Recent Facts About Photovoltaics in Germany

Recent Facts about Photovoltaics in Germany
Current version available at https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/recent-

facts-about-pv-in-germany.html
Compiled by
Dr. Harry Wirth
Division Director Photovoltaics
Modules and Power Plants
Fraunhofer ISE
Contact:
Karin Schneider
Press and Public Relations
Phone +49 761 4588-5147
Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE
Heidenhofstrasse 2
79110 Freiburg, Germany
info@ise.fraunhofer.de
Citation note: Recent Facts about Photovoltaics in Germany, Harry Wirth, Fraunhofer ISE,
download from https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/recent-facts-
about-pv-in-germany.html, version of March 11, 2021
210311_Recent_Facts_about_PV_in_Germany.docx 1 (100)
Table of Contents
1 What purpose does this guide serve? ............................................................... 5

2 Are we reaching our annual capacity target? .................................................. 5
3 Does PV contribute significantly to the power supply?................................... 6
4 Is PV power too expensive? ............................................................................... 6
4.1 Levelized Cost of Energy ...................................................................................... 7
4.2 Feed-in Tariff ........................................................................................................ 9
4.3 Pricing on the energy exchange and the merit order effect .............................11
4.4 Determining the Differential Costs ....................................................................14
4.5 Privileged Electricity Consumers .........................................................................15
4.6 EEG Surcharge .....................................................................................................15
5 Subventions and Electricity Prices ................................................................... 17
5.1 Is PV power subsidized? ......................................................................................17
5.2 Are fossil fuel and nuclear power production subsidized? ...............................18
5.2.1 Fossil energy sources ......................................................................................................... 18
5.2.2 Nuclear power................................................................................................................... 19
5.3 Do tenants subsidize well-positioned home owners?.......................................20
5.4 Does PV make electricity more expensive for householders? ...........................20
5.5 Does PV increase the electricity price for industry?...........................................22
6 Are we exporting large amounts of PV power to other European nations? 23
7 Can small PV systems generate attractive returns? ....................................... 24
8 Does installing PV only create jobs in Asia? ................................................... 26
9 Are large energy suppliers interested in PV? ................................................. 27
10 Is PV research taking up high levels of funding? ........................................... 30
11 Does PV power overload our energy system? ................................................ 31
11.1 Transmission and distribution ............................................................................31
11.2 Volatility ..............................................................................................................32
11.2.1 Solar power production is predictable ........................................................................... 32
11.2.2 Peak production is significantly lower than installed PV capacity ................................... 33
11.2.3 Solar and wind energy complement each other ............................................................ 33
11.3 Controllability ......................................................................................................35
11.4 Conflicts with slow-response fossil and nuclear power plants .........................35
11.5 Does volatile solar power endanger security of supply? ..................................37
11.6 Does the expansion of PV have to wait for more storage? ..............................37
12 Does the manufacture of PV modules consume more energy than they can
produce?............................................................................................................ 38
13 Is there enough space for PV in Germany? ..................................................... 38
13.1 Do electricity and food production compete on arable land?...........................40
13.2 Do PV systems destroy ecologically valuable areas? .........................................41
14 Do PV power plants find acceptance in the population?............................... 42
15 Are PV plants in Germany efficient? ............................................................... 43
15.1 Do PV plants degrade? ........................................................................................44
15.2 Can PV modules become soiled? ........................................................................44
15.3 Do PV plants often operate at full capacity? .....................................................45
16 Does PV make relevant contributions to climate protection? ....................... 48
16.1 Do anthropogenic CO2 emissions danger the climate?......................................48
16.2 Does PV make a significant contribution to reducing the CO2 emissions? .......50
16.3 In addition to CO2 are there other environmentally harmful gases released
during the production of PV? .........................................................................................53
16.4 Do dark PV modules warm up the Earth through their absorption? ................53
17 Are PV systems capable of replacing fossil fuel and nuclear power plants? 54
18 Are we capable of covering a significant proportion of our energy demand
with PV power? ................................................................................................ 54
18.1 Energy demand and supply ................................................................................54
18.2 Energy scenarios..................................................................................................58
18.3 Transformation measures ...................................................................................62
18.3.1 Keeping PV power production constant ........................................................................ 62
18.3.2 Complementary operation of power plants ................................................................... 64
18.3.3 Increasing the energy efficiency .................................................................................... 65
18.3.4 Load management ........................................................................................................ 67
18.3.5 Balanced expansion of PV and wind power capacities ................................................... 68
18.3.6 Cogeneration of power and heat .................................................................................. 69
18.3.7 Energy storage .............................................................................................................. 69
18.3.8 Grid expansion .............................................................................................................. 75
18.3.9 Overview ...................................................................................................................... 76
18.4 Does the energy transformation have to wait for federal policy? ...................79
19 Do we need PV production in Germany? ........................................................ 79
20 Does it still need a Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG)? ............................ 80
21 Do PV modules contain toxic substances? ...................................................... 80
21.1 Wafer-based modules .........................................................................................80
21.2 Thin-film modules ...............................................................................................81
21.3 Solar glass ............................................................................................................81
21.4 Take-back schemes and recycling .......................................................................81
22 Are there enough raw materials available for PV production?..................... 82
22.1 Wafer-based modules .........................................................................................82
22.2 Thin-film modules ...............................................................................................82
23 Do PV plants increase the risk of fire? ............................................................ 82
23.1 Can defective PV plants cause a fire? .................................................................82
23.2 Do PV plants pose a danger to firefighters? ......................................................83
23.3 Do PV modules prevent firefighters from extinguishing fires externally from
the roof? ..........................................................................................................................83
23.4 Are toxic emissions released when PV modules burn? .....................................84
24 Appendix: Terminology.................................................................................... 85
24.1 EEG surcharge ......................................................................................................85
24.2 Module efficiency ................................................................................................86
24.3 Rated power of a PV power plant ......................................................................86
24.4 Specific yield ........................................................................................................86
24.5 System efficiency.................................................................................................86
24.6 Performance ratio ................................................................................................86
24.7 Base load, intermediate load, peak load, grid load and residual load .............87
24.8 Electricity generation and consumption ............................................................87
25 Appendix: Conversion tables [EEBW] ............................................................. 89
26 Appendix: Abbreviations ................................................................................. 90
27 Appendix: Sources ............................................................................................ 90
28 Appendix: Figures ............................................................................................. 98
1 What purpose does this guide serve?
Germany is leaving the fossil-nuclear age behind, paving the way for photovoltaics (PV)
to play a central role in a future shaped by sustainable power production. This compilation
of current facts, figures and findings is regularly updated. It aims to help in creating an
overall assessment of PV growth in Germany.
2 Are we reaching our annual capacity target?

The annual target of the German Federal Government for PV capacity increase of 2.5 GW
was exceeded in 2020, but the goals of the energy transformation are still far away.
In order to cover all of our energy needs from renewable energies (RE), a massive expan-
sion of the installed PV power is necessary, along with a number of other measures. More
recent model-based scenarios calculate a reduction of energy-related greenhouse gas
emissions by at least 90% in relation to 1990, with a PV expansion corridor of
130-650 GWp nominal capacity ([Prog], [BCG], [ESYS], [ISE11], [UBA8], [IRENA], [ISE12]).
The scenarios make different assumptions about boundary conditions, e.g. for energy
source imports and questions of acceptance. Based on the scenarios "reference" and "in-
acceptance" [ISE12], a magnitude of 500 GWp installed PV capacity seems to be plausible.
If we calculate a PV expansion to 500 GWp by 2050, an average of 15 GWp of PV will

have to be added annually. Increasingly, old systems must also be replaced. These replace-
ment installations are currently still of little importance, but they will increase to the same
order of magnitude of 15 GWp per year when fully expanded, assuming a lifetime of 30
years.
The German Renewable Energy Sources Act [EEG2021] defines the goal of making the
electricity generated or consumed in Germany greenhouse gas neutral by 2050 at the
latest. An intermediate target of 2030 is set at a share of renewable energies (RE) of 65
percent of gross electricity consumption. This requires an average annual PV addition of
at least 5-10 GWp, depending on the development of electricity demand and the expan-
sion of wind power ([AGORA1], [BEE]). The German Renewable Energy Sources Act
[EEG2021], on the other hand, sets the PV expansion target at 100 GWp, corresponding
to an average addition of just under 5 GWp per year.
From 2013-2018, power plants with a nominal output of only 1.9 GWp/a were installed
on average in Germany [BMWi1], in 2020, according to initial projections by Solar Power
Europe, the figure was 4.8 GWp.
3 Does PV contribute significantly to the power supply?
Yes.
According to initial projections, PV covered 9.3% of gross electricity consumption in Ger-
many in 2020, with electricity generation of 50 TWh [BDEW3]; all renewables (RE) com-
bined came to 46% (Figure 1: Percentage renewable energy in net electricity consumption
for Germany, data from [BMWi1], [BDEW3], [ISE4]). Gross electricity consumption includes
grid, storage, and self-consumption losses (Section 24.8). On sunny days, PV electricity
can temporarily cover more than two-thirds of our current electricity consumption. At the
end of 2020, PV modules with a nominal capacity of 54 GWp were installed in Germany
[ISE4], distributed over 2 million systems [BSW1].
Figure 1: Percentage renewable energy in net electricity consumption for Germany, data from
[BMWi1], [BDEW3], [ISE4]
4 Is PV power too expensive?

It depends on the reference point.
The cost comparison with fossil and nuclear power generation is made more difficult by
the fact that their external costs and risks in terms of environmental, climate and health
damage are largely not taken into account in pricing ([UBA3], [FÖS1], [FÖS2]). Hiding
these external costs represents a massive subsidy to the energy sources involved (Section
5.2).
The marginal costs for nuclear power are in the order of 1 €-ct/kWh, for coal-fired power
3-7 €-cts/kWh, for gas-fired power 6-9 €-cts/kWh. The fixed costs of power generation
(e.g. investments, capital) are added on top of this. The marginal costs essentially cover
the provision of the fuel, but not the neutralization of the radiating waste or polluting
emissions (CO2, NOx, SOx, Hg).
New MW power plants produce PV electricity at a cost of 3-5 ct/kWh in Germany, pro-
vided that the volatile electricity is sold in full. The lowest bid price to date for power
plants up to 10 MW is 3.55 ct/kWh. Newly built, larger power plants that are operated
directly by utilities outside the German Renewable Energy Sources Act (RES) or supply their
electricity via offtake agreements are likely to produce at costs well below 4 ct/kWh. Newly
constructed, smaller power plants have higher LCOE, in the order of 10 ct/kWh for rooftop
installations of a few kW nominal capacity. Older PV power plants produce solar electricity
much more expensively due to the previously very high investment costs.
To promote the energy turnaround and to stimulate investments in PV systems of various

sizes, in the year 2000 the instrument of the German Renewable Energy Sources Act was
created. It is intended to enable the plant operator to run the plant at a reasonable profit
with a guaranteed purchase. Furthermore, the German Renewable Energy Sources Act
aims at continuously reducing the LCOE from RE by securing a substantial market for RE
systems (see section 4.1).
Increasing PV capacity is only one of the costs in Germany’s energy transformation. For a
long time, the costs associated with PV expansion stood in the forefront of the discussions.
Over the past few years, PV and wind have an established place in Germany’s energy
supply system, bringing new costs to the fore. Besides the costs for electricity generation,
costs in the following areas are becoming increasingly significant:
• Expanding the north-south power lines for wind power

• Shutdown of nuclear power plants
• Dismantling and modification of fossil power plants to enable a more flexible op-
eration during reduced utilization
• Build up storage and converter capacities i.e. for grid-stabilization (stationary bat-
teries and electric mobility, pumped storage, heat pumps, heat storage,
Power-to-X)
These costs are not caused by the increase in PV installations but rather, as with the ex-
pansion of PV itself, are associated with the normal progression of the energy transfor-
mation. All energy consumers for whom a long-term sustainable energy supply must be
created are, in turn, responsible for the costs of its realization.
What would be the price to pay if the energy transformation fails? Without knowing this
figure, it is difficult to assess the costs of the transition.
4.1 Levelized Cost of Energy

The levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for a PV power plant is the ratio between the total
costs of the plant (€) and its total electricity production (kWh) over its economic lifetime.
The total costs for PV power plants [ISE1] is based primarily on:
1. purchase investments to construct and install the plant

2. financing conditions (return on investment, interest, plant lifetime)
3. operating costs over the lifetime of the plant (insurance, maintenance, repairs)
4. deconstruction costs
The annual operating costs of a PV power plant are comparatively low at about 1% of
the investment costs, and the financing costs are also favorable due to the current low
interest rates. Thanks to technological progress, the learning curve and economies-of-
scale, the investment costs for PV power plants, which make up the greatest outlay, have
fallen an average of 12 percent per year – in all, 75 % since 2008. Figure 2 shows the
price development since 2006 for rooftop installations between 10 kWp to 100 kWp in
Germany.
Figure 2: Average end customer price (net system price) for installed rooftop systems with rated
nominal power from 10 - 100 kWp [ISE10], data BSW-Solar.
Module costs are responsible for almost half of the total investment costs of a PV power
plant of this size. The price development of PV modules follows a so-called «price learning
curve,” in which doubling the total capacity installed causes prices to fall by a constant
percentage. Figure 3 shows inflation-adjusted world market prices. At the end of 2020,
more than 700 GWp of PV power had been installed worldwide. Provided that significant
progress continues to be made in product development and manufacturing processes,
prices are expected to keep dropping in accordance with this rule.
The average price includes all market-relevant technologies, i.e. crystalline silicon and thin
film. The trend indicates a price reduction of about 24% with a doubling of the cumulative
installed capacity. The tenders of the Federal Network Agency provide an orientation value
for electricity generation costs from new PV ground-mounted systems (see following sec-
tion).
Figure 3: Historical price development of PV modules (PSE AG/Fraunhofer ISE, data from: Strate-
gies Unlimited/Navigant Consulting/EuPD). The straight line shows the price development trend.
The average price shown includes all market-relevant technologies in the fields of crystal-
line silicon and thin-film technology. The trend indicates that doubling the cumulative
installed PV capacity results in a price reduction of 24 percent. In Germany module prices
lie about 10-20% higher than on world market, due to anti-dumping measures of the
European Commission. The licensing round of the Federal Network Agency (see following
section) gives a benchmark for the electricity generation costs for new open-field PV sys-
tems (< 10 MW).
4.2 Feed-in Tariff

The German energy transformation requires large investments in solar and wind capacity.
In order to build a PV power plant today, an investor needs a purchasing guarantee that
stipulates a fixed price over the economic life of the power plant. Otherwise, the investor
may delay his investment based on trends that show PV power plant costs continue to
decline (deflation). Since all installed PV power plants produce electricity largely simulta-
neously, the more expensive electricity from the older power plants would no longer be
competitive in the future.
To delay PV expansion in hopes of lower costs in the future would not only be a cynical
reaction with respect to the progressing climate change but would also slow down the
dynamics of cost reductions. The first German Renewable Energy Sources Act in 2000 and
the subsequent changes have shaped the growth of PV installments in Germany.
The German Renewable Energy Sources Act [EEG2021] tries to promote and constrain PV
expansion at the same time:
• PV systems may only be constructed on arable land in 200 m corridors along fed-
eral motorways and railways
• The size of PV ground-mounted systems has been limited to 20 MW
• The power of PV systems must either be able to be reduced to 70% of their nom-
inal capacity or be regulated by the grid operator
• Self-consumed PV energy is taxed above a certain nominal power (approx. 30 kW
nominal system power) with 40% of the current German Renewable Energy
Sources Act surcharge (Section 4.6), which means that the PV electricity generation
costs increase by approx. 2.6 € ct / kWh
• Plants only receive a fixed feed-in tariff up to a nominal power of 100 kW; For
plants with a rated output of 100-750 kW, the PV energy must be marketed di-
rectly
• New plants with a rated output of more than 750 kW are required to partake in
calls for tender and must not contribute to self-consumption; the annual tender
volume is limited
Depending on the system size, the feed-in tariff for small roof systems put into operation
until January 2021 can be up to 8,16 €-cts/kWh and is guaranteed to the operator over
the next twenty years. For medium-size systems from 750 kW up to 20 MW, the feed-in
tariff is set by the licensing agreement. The last licensing round of the Federal Network
Agency on the bid date February 1, 2018 set the lowest mean value of 4.33 €-cts/kWh
ever.
To compare: The tender for electricity from onshore wind systems for the same bid date
brought an average price of 4.60 €-cts/kWh. On the global scale PV electricity prices in
locations with high radiation levels has been offered at record low levels from 1.75 (Bra-
silia) to 2 $cts/kWh (USA). The negotiated strike price for the planned nuclear plant Hin-
kley Point C in England translates essentially to a feed-in tariff of 12 €-cts/kWh plus infla-
tionary adjustment for a period of 35 years. The plant is planned to start operation in
2025. The feed-in tariff for PV power drops faster than any other regenerative power
source, in the last 15 years approx. 80% for small rooftop installations and 90% for sys-
tems of medium size.
Figure 4: Feed-in tariff for PV power as a function of commissioning date, average remuneration
of the bidding rounds of the Federal Network Agency, electricity prices and average compensa-
tion for PV power, data from [BMWi1], [BDEW6].
The user who consumes self-generated electricity can by no means consider the difference
between the gross electricity price (electricity from the grid) and the feed-in tariff of the
German Renewable Energy Sources Act (estimated value of the electricity generation
costs) as profit. For one, self-consumption increases the fixed costs per kilowatt-hour with-
drawn. Considering that the same connection costs are distributed over a smaller amount
of withdrawn electricity, the electricity purchased per kWh becomes more expensive. Also,
the electricity withdrawn from a PV system for self-consumption may be subject to extra
taxes and charges. These can reach appreciable values, depending on the tax classification
of the system [SFV]. Electricity produced by PV systems >30 kWp which were put into
operation after 2021 are subjected to a portion of the levy according to the German Re-
newable Energy Sources Act.
After 2021, the feed-in tariff will gradually expire for the oldest plants, as their 20-year
payment period is reached. However, these plants will continue to supply power at lev-
elized costs that undercut those of all other fossil fuel and renewable energy sources, due
to low operating costs and zero fuel costs.
4.3 Pricing on the energy exchange and the merit order effect
To estimate sales revenues from PV electricity, a mean electricity price is calculated based
on the prices achieved on the European Energy Exchange (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Electricity price development on the day-ahead spot market [BDEW6]
The running EEX price is determined by the merit order principle (Figure 6). The electricity
producers' sales offers for certain quantities of electricity, usually defined by the respective
marginal costs, are sorted by price in ascending order. The purchase offers of the power
consumers are sorted in descending order. The intersection of the curves gives the ex-
change price for the total traded quantity. The most expensive offer that is accepted thus
determines the profit margins of the less expensive suppliers.
PV power feed-in has legal priority, meaning that it is found at the start of the pricing
scale due to the merit order effect. With fictitious marginal costs of zero, PV power is
always sold when available. PV power is predominantly generated during the middle of
the day when power consumption (and previously, but no longer, the electricity price) is
at its midday peak. During these periods, PV power mainly displaces electricity from ex-
pensive peak-load power plants (especially gas-fired plants and pumped-storage). This
displacement lowers the spot price of electricity on the market and leads to the merit
order effect of PV feed-in (Figure 7). Together with the prices the revenues of all conven-
tional power producers (nuclear power, coal, gas) sink. However, the revenues for elec-
tricity from RES (solar power, wind power, hydropower) are also falling accordingly. Fur-
thermore, solar power reduces the utilization of conventional peak load power plants
(gas, water).
Waste
Nuclear energy
Lignite
Hard coal
Gas and steam combined cycle power plant
Gas turbines
Mineral oil products
Other
Marginal costs in €/MWH
Load in MW
Figure 6: Merit order for conventional power plants in 2018 with an average CO2 certificate price
of € 16 per ton [FFE].
The increasing amount of renewable electricity being fed into the grid, lower coal prices
and surplus of CO2 allowances have drastically depressed prices on the EEX (Figure 8).
PV electricity achieves over several years a market value factor of approx. 0.85 - 0.9
[ÜNB] on the electricity exchange on an annual average, i.e. the revenue generated per
kWh is slightly below the average exchange electricity price. The market price factor for
on-shore wind power was about 0.8 - 0.9 [ÜNB].
Figure 7: Influence of RE on the average spot price on the energy exchange (EEX) [BDEW2].
With further expansion of volatile renewables, their market value factor will decline in
the medium term, because the supply of electricity increases at times of high feed-in
and both PV and wind power have a high simultaneity. For PV, a decrease of the market
value factor to 0.8 by 2030 is expected [ZSW].
With increasing feed-in of renewable electricity, the EEX becomes more and more a
market for residual electricity, generating a price for the demand-related provision of
renewable electricity and no longer reflecting the value of electricity.
4.4 Determining the Differential Costs

The remuneration for PV power feed in accordance with the German EEG is determined
annually by the transmission system operators. The differential costs shall cover the gap
between the remunerations paid out according to the EEG promotion and the sales reve-
nue collected from PV electricity. Following a peak of almost 7 €-cts/kWh, the spot price
of electricity, used to determine the differential costs, has since fallen to below
3 €-cts/kWh in 2020. The amount of electricity from PV and wind that is fed into the grid
is increasing. This reduces the spot market price through the Merit Order Effect and
thereby, paradoxically increases the calculated differential costs. According to this
method, the more PV installed, the more expensive the support of PV appears to be.
Figure 8 shows the development of the differential costs for the yearly remuneration of
the PV electricity generated. After a strong increase until 2014, the amount stabilized
between € 9 and 10 billion.
Figure 8: PV expansion and remuneration amount, data from [BMWi1], [BMWi5]
A study by the Friedrich-Alexander-University in Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany has shown

that in the years 2011 to 2018 a total of € 157 billion in EEG differential costs has been
incurred, while in the same time cost savings of € 227 billion due to the feed-in of PV and
wind power were realized [FAU]. On balance, consumers thus saved € 71 billion.
4.5 Privileged Electricity Consumers

Policy makers determine who shall finance the transformation to renewable energy
[BAFA]. They decided that energy-intensive industries, i.e. those who spend a high pro-
portion of their costs on electricity, are to be exempted from the EEG surcharge to a large
extent. In 2019, a share of 44% of industrial consumption was privileged (Figure 9). This
wide-scale exemption increases the burden on the other electricity customers, in particu-
lar, private households, who account for almost 30 percent of the total power consumed.
Figure 9: Electricity consumption of industry and EEG surcharge 2019 [BDEW6]
The surcharge exemption for privileged customers as set down in the EEG has further
increased the nominal EEG surcharge per kilowatt hour (see Section 5.5). At the same
time, energy-intensive industries are benefiting from the lower spot prices on during peak-
power times. It is evident that part of the surcharge indirectly ends up in the pockets of
these energy-intensive industries: «Energy-intensive companies, which are either largely
exempt from the EEG surcharge or pay a reduced rate of 0.05 €-cts/kWh, benefit the most
from the merit order effect. For these companies, the lower prices brought about by the
merit order effect overcompensates for the costs incurred as a result of the EEG surcharge
by far.” [IZES] Energy-intensive companies therefore benefit from the energy transfor-
mation without making a noteworthy contribution.
4.6 EEG Surcharge

The difference between the remunerations paid out and the sales revenues generated
from renewable electricity (supplemented by other items) is compensated by the
EEG surcharge (Figure 10). The cost of the surcharge is borne by those power consumers,
who do not fall under the exemption scheme. In 2021 there will be a grant from the
federal budget (Energy and Climate Fund) of €10.8 billion for the first time. For 2021, the
EEG surcharge is set at 6.5 €-cts/kWh. End users must pay value added tax (19%) on this
surcharge.
Figure 10: Influential parameters and calculating method for the EEG surcharge [ÖKO]
Based on the way it´s defined, the EEG surcharge would increase for the following rea-
sons:
1. Increasing quantities of power used by «privileged” consumers
Because energy-intensive industries are virtually exempt from contributing to the sur-
charge, smaller-sized consumers, such as private households, small industry and com-
mercial consumers must bear additional costs amounting to billions of euros.
2. Merit order effect and PV feed-in during daytime.
PV power feed-in during, for example, midday when the EEX spot price formerly
peaked reduced the electricity price very effectively, benefitting electricity customers.
(See section 4.3). At the same time, however, the difference between the feed-in tariff
and the market price, the basis of calculating the EEG surcharge, increased. This also
disadvantages smaller customers bound to pay the EEG levy.
3. Merit order effect and electricity surplus
For years, Germany has been producing more electricity than necessary from fossil and
nuclear power plants (see Section 6). This oversupply also lowers the exchange elec-
tricity price via the merit order effect and pushing peak power plants out of the energy
mix.
4. Declining electricity consumption through efficiency measures
Initiatives supporting more efficient energy use (e.g. energy saving lamps) reduce the
amount of electricity purchased, and thereby increase the surcharge per kWh con-
sumed.
5. Additional expenditure from compulsory direct marketing
The compulsory direct marketing creates additional administrative expense which
must be compensated by increased EEG remuneration for electricity producers.
6. Increasing production from RE power, without self-consumption
The expansion of RE drives the levy up at least on the short term both directly (because
more feed-in remuneration is paid out) as well as indirectly (due to the reduced price
of emission certificates leading to a cheaper price for energy from fossil fuel plants.)
5 Subventions and Electricity Prices

5.1 Is PV power subsidized?
A subsidy is defined as a benefit from public funds. Up to and including 2020, the subsidy
for PV electricity generation did not come from public funds, but from a selective con-
sumption levy, which applies also to self-produced and self-consumed PV electricity. En-
ergy consumers make a compulsory contribution for the - necessary and approved - trans-
formation of our energy system. This interpretation is also supported by the European
Commission. The amount of the levy also does not correspond to the total remuneration,
but to the differential costs. The cumulative costs paid out for PV power fed into the grid
up to and including 2020 amounted to ca. 100 billion euros [BMWi5]. In 2021, for the
first time there will be a contribution from the Federal Government's Energy and Climate
Fund (section 4.6). The revenues of the Energy and Climate Fund come from emissions
trading and from federal subsidies, thus there is a partial subsidy.
To calculate the EEG surcharge, the financial benefits of PV power are determined accord-
ing to the market clearing price. By this method, the benefits of PV power are underesti-
mated systematically. For one, PV power has long been having the desired effect on this
market price, namely that of driving it downwards (see section 4.3). Second, the market
price leaves out the heavy external costs of fossil fuel and nuclear power production (Sec-
tion 5.2). Considering total costs of fossil fuel and nuclear power production of ca.
10 €-cts/kWh, the additional costs of the PV feed-in tariff decline so quickly that the first
intersection point occurs already in 2013. The differential cost decrease to zero and there-
after are negative.
In this way, the development of renewable energy will secure a long-term supply of energy
at a reasonable cost, since it is clear that we cannot afford fossil and nuclear energy for
much longer. Our industry needs a supply perspective, as do households.
The electricity policy can learn from the bitter lessons experienced in housing construction
policy. Because comprehensive measures to renovate the existing building stock have not
been undertaken to date, many low-income households must apply for social funds to be
able to pay for their heating fuel. Some of this money flows to foreign oil and gas suppliers
to release huge amounts of CO2 as a by-product with the heat generated. What would
be the price to pay if the German energy transformation fails? Without knowing this fig-
ure, it is difficult to make a statement as to the total costs required to transform our
energy supply system.
5.2 Are fossil fuel and nuclear power production subsidized?

Yes, moreover, the future costs of the subsidy are not yet calculable.
Policy makers influences the price of electricity from fossil and nuclear power plants. Po-
litical decisions define the price of CO2 emission allowances, the conditions for filtering
smoke or for the permanent storage of CO2, the taxation of nuclear power or the insur-
ance and safety requirements for nuclear power plants. Policy makers thus determine the
extent to which electricity consumers bear the elusive risks and burdens of fossil and nu-
clear power generation. These largely arise in the future, through the CO2-induced climate
crisis, the final disposal of nuclear waste and eternal liabilities from hard coal mining. If
these costs are priced in more consistently, PV power generation will end up making the
electricity mix cheaper. Until we get to that point, fossil and nuclear power will be sold at
prices that mask its external costs and pass the burden on to future generations.
5.2.1 Fossil energy sources

Fossil power generation is hardly burdened by costs for CO2 certificates. It is true that EU-
wide emissions trading (European Union Emissions Trading System, EU ETS) was intro-
duced in 2005 to make CO2 emissions more expensive and to begin internalizing the costs.
However, due to an oversupply of certificates, the price had collapsed by the end of 2017.
Across Europe, certificate trading also covers only 45% of greenhouse gas emissions be-
cause important sectors beyond industry and energy are excluded [UBA5]. Even with cer-
tificate prices of up to €30/t CO2 [Figure 11], the EU ETS still has little steering effect. In
Germany, a national emissions trading system for the heat and transport sectors started
in January 2021 with a CO2 price of 25 €/t [NEHS].
The direct and indirect consequential costs of global climate change, which will also affect
Germany, are difficult to estimate. According to calculations by the Federal Environment
Agency, the emission of one ton of CO2 causes damages of around 180 €/t. In terms of
Germany's greenhouse gas emissions in 2016, this corresponds to costs of around 164
billion euros [UBA3]. The recycling of CO2 from the atmosphere via direct air capture pilot
plants currently costs about 550 €/t.
Taking externalities into account, the total societal costs for lignite-based electricity in
2017 were around 22-24 ct/kWh, many times higher than the pure electricity production
costs of 3.4-4.7 ct/kWh [FÖS2]. A study by the International Monetary Fund estimates
global subsidies for coal, oil and natural gas, including external costs, at US$5.1 trillion in
2015 [IMF].
Figure 11: Price of CO2 allowances [BDEW6]
5.2.2 Nuclear power

According to experts, the risks of nuclear power are so severe that no insurance or rein-
surance company in the world dares to offer policies. Accidental damage during the op-
eration of nuclear power plants is only covered up to € 250 million by the insurance mar-
ket, up to € 2.5 billion by an operator pool; in the case of larger damage, the operators
of the nuclear power plants are only liable with their assets [ATW1]. By way of compari-
son, the nuclear catastrophe at Fukushima caused damage of around €100 billion, which
is many times higher than the enterprise value of German nuclear power plant operators.
A study by Versicherungsforen Leipzig sets the limit of liability for the risk of the most
serious type of nuclear meltdown at 6 trillion euros, which, depending on the time period
over which this sum is accrued, would increase the electricity price per kilowatt hour to
between 0.14 and 67.30 euros [VFL]. As a result, it is essentially the tax payers who act
as the nuclear industry’s insurers. This is essentially forced upon them both against their
wishes, since the majority of Germans have been opposed to nuclear energy for many
years, and as an unspecified amount, because no fixed price has been established to date
for damage settlements. Taking externalities into account, the total societal cost of nuclear
power in 2019 was around 24-28 ct/kWh [FÖS1]. Studies that exclude accident risks due
to their high indeterminacy conclude significantly lower values.
Germany will shut down its remaining nuclear power plants by 2022. This will stop the
chain reactions in the fuel rods and eliminate the risk of a nuclear GSA (greatest supposed
accident).
Whether the operators' financial reserves for dismantling the nuclear power plants will be
sufficient is not foreseeable today. The state has received €24 billion from the power plant
operators for taking over Germany's nuclear waste, which has been paid into a fund. It is
equally uncertain whether the income from this fund will be sufficient to pay for the con-
struction and commissioning of a disposal site by 2050; according to calculations by the
Commission on the Final Disposal of Nuclear Waste, the total costs are estimated at €176
billion.
The EURATOM Treaty of 1957 allows EU Member States to subsidize nuclear power
plants, which is not allowed in other sectors for competitive reasons. This derogation has
played an important role in financing the UK nuclear power plant Hinkley Point C through
generous guaranteed feed-in tariffs from taxpayers' money [FÖS3]. The project was cal-
culated for a return of 9% over a period of 60 years.
5.3 Do tenants subsidize well-positioned home owners?

No.
This notion, which makes a popular headline and in this instance is taken from the «Die
Zeit” newspaper published on December 8, 2011 is a distorted image of reality. Except
for the politically willed exception granted to energy-intensive industry, the costs of
switching our energy system to RE are being borne by all consumers (including home
owners, and there including owners and renters) according to the cost-by-cause principle.
In addition to PV, these costs also contribute funding to wind power and other renewa-
bles. All electricity customers can decrease their energy consumption by selecting and
using energy efficient appliances. Many municipalities offer free consultations on energy
saving advice and also grants to help pay for new, more efficient devices. Electricity tariffs
that increase with consumption would be a suitable means to reduce the burden on low-
income households and simultaneously to reward energy efficiency.
PV systems installed by home owners are usually under 10 kWp. The systems within this
power range make up less than 15% of the total installed PV power in Germany, while
large systems above 500 kWp make up about 30 % (Figure 20). The larger systems are
often financed with citizen participation or funds, in which tenants can also participate.
5.4 Does PV make electricity more expensive for householders?

Yes.
However, private households bear many additional charges within their electricity bill. The
German legislature sets the principles for calculating and distributing the EEG surcharge,
and other taxes and fees, the effects of which are currently detrimental to householders.
Figure 12: Components of the average domestic electricity price in 2020 (CHP: German Combined
Heat and Power Act); German Electricity Grid Access Ordinance (Strom-NEV): easing the burden
on energy-intensive industries; concession fee: fee for using public land) [BDEW6].
In 2020 a typical household with an annual power consumption of 3,500 kWh pays an
electricity price of approx. 31,71 €-cts/kWh in 2019 [BDEW6]. Figure 12 shows a typical
breakdown of this electricity price. The electricity levy was introduced in 1999. According
to the law, the levy intends to make electricity more expensive; the proceeds go principally
into the public pension fund. Private households must pay value added tax on the elec-
tricity levy and the EEG surcharge.
Figure 13: Development of gross domestic electricity prices, net electricity prices for large-scale
industrial consumers and the EEG surcharge, data from [BMWi1]
The price of electricity for private households in Germany is approx. 50% higher than the
European average (source: stromreport.de, year under review 2020), but the purchasing
power per German inhabitant is also 60% higher (source: statista.de, year under review
2019). If electricity prices and purchasing power are taken into account, Germany is in
the European middle range. Germany has a very high level of security of supply: in low-
price countries such as Romania or Bulgaria, power cuts are common.
5.5 Does PV increase the electricity price for industry?

Yes and no. There are clear winners but also losers.
According to the German Industrial Energy and Power Federation (VIK), the electricity
price for medium-voltage customers has developed since 2009. Winners were the com-
panies that can be exempted from the EEG surcharge (see VIK base index, Figure 14). The
VIK Retail Price Index for non-privileged companies is well above the base index. This is
mainly due to the EEG surcharge which makes up part of the final selling price.
Figure 14: VIK Verband der Industriellen Energie- und Kraftwirtschaft e.V., electricity price index
for medium-voltage customers [VIK]
6 Are we exporting large amounts of PV power to other European

nations?
No, the increased export surplus comes primarily from coal power plants.
Figure 15 shows the increase in electricity exports since 2011 [ISE4]. The monthly values
of the Energy Charts (www.energy-charts.de) show that the export surplus was conspic-
uously high in winter, i.e. in months with a particularly low PV power production. The
average export price per kWh of electricity differs slightly from the average import price.
The fact that the German power plant park is increasingly producing for export should
also be related to the low production costs for coal electricity, in particular the low CO2
certificate prices (Section 5.2) of recent years.
Figure 15: Electricity export (negative values indicate export) for Germany [ISE4]
7 Can small PV systems generate attractive returns?

Yes.
In principle, small PV systems can generate returns both via the EEG remuneration for
feeding electricity into the grid and via the reduction in electricity consumption thanks to
self-consumption. Due to the sharp drop in prices for PV modules, attractive returns are
possible. The Solar Cluster Baden-Württemberg has estimated returns of up to 5% for
small systems without battery storage and with self-consumption of around 25% [SCBW].
Self-consumption becomes more worthwhile, the greater the difference is between the
cost of delivering PV electricity and the LCOE of the PV system. For systems without energy
storage, the self-consumption is dependent on coinciding supply and demand profiles.
Independent of the system size, households generally consume 20-40 % of their self-
produced electricity [Quasch]. Larger systems increase the percentage of PV coverage for
the total power, however, reduce the percentage of self-consumption. Commercial or
industry consumers achieve a particularly high rate of self-consumption as long as their
consumption profile doesn’t collapse on the weekends (e.g. Refrigerated warehouses,
hotels and restaurants, hospitals, server centers, retail). Energy storage and technologies
for energy transformation offer a large potential for increasing the self-consumption
(compare Section 18.3).
The PV system yield is higher in sunny regions. In fact, the regional difference in the annual
sum of irradiation is not transferred in a one-to-one ratio to the specific yield (kWh/kWp,
see section 24.4.), because, for example, the operating temperature of the modules, pol-
lution effects or the duration of the snow cover also play a role.
Figure 16: Rough estimate of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for PV power plants at different
annual irradiances
To obtain a rough estimate of the discounted LCOE (not adjusted for inflation, see Figure
16), the following assumptions were used:
• optimal orientation of module (approximately 30° south)
• average annual total of horizontal global irradiation in Germany 1088 kWh/m2/a
• performance ratio (section 24.6) of 85 percent
• annual yield degradation of 0.5 percent
• lifetime of 20 years
• annual operating costs of 1 percent (of plant price)
• inflation rate of 0 percent
• nominal imputed interest rate of 5 percent (average of own and borrowed capital
investments)
The levelized cost of energy (LCOE) is estimated using the net present value method, ac-
cording to which, the running costs and LCOE are discounted by the interest rate given
at the time the plant was commissioned. The LCOE values determined are not adjusted
for inflation. This makes it easier to compare them with the feed-in tariff which is constant
in nominal terms but declines in real terms.
In the event of a 100 percent equity investment, the imputed interest is equal to the rate
of return. To compare, the Federal Network Agency (Bundesnetzagentur) set the return
on equity at 9.05 percent (before corporate tax) for both new and further investments in
the electricity and gas networks [BNA1].
Neither the manufacturer’s guarantee nor plant insurance policies are able to remove the
risk to the investor entirely. The use of electricity from the 21st year of operation will be
regulated for the first time by the German Renewable Energy Act 2021 [EEG2021]. It is
expected that many plants will still produce considerable amounts of electricity at marginal
running costs. The self-consumption capability plays a major role in calculating the con-
tinued operation of "de-subsidized" plants [SCBW1].
8 Does installing PV only create jobs in Asia?

No, however over the last few years Germany lost many jobs in the PV industry.
In 2018, the PV industry employed 24,000 people in Germany [BSW]. By comparison,

about 21,000 people still worked in lignite mining and lignite-fired power plants in 2015
[ÖKO1]. Businesses from the following sectors contribute to the German PV industry:
1. manufacture of materials: solar silicon, metal pastes, bus bars, plastic films, solar glass,
coated glass
2. manufacture of intermediate and final products: modules, cables, inverters, mounting
structures, tracker systems
3. mechanical engineering for cell and module production
4. installation (especially trade)
5. power plant operation and maintenance
In 2019, the German inverter manufacturers held notable shares of the global market
with approx. 10%, silicon manufacturers (Wacker), silver paste manufacturers (Heraeus)
and manufacturers of production systems.
Many jobs were lost in Germany in the last few years as a result of company closures and
insolvency, which affected cell and module manufacturers, the mechanical engineering
industry and installers. In 2007, the plan that the combination of EEG, investment grants
in the (new) eastern states of Germany and research support would help establish Ger-
many as a worldwide leading production site for PV cells and modules appeared to work.
A German company led the international rankings in production volume. Since then, how-
ever, the market share of German manufactures has decreased dramatically due to the
industrial policy in Asia and the huge investments put into in production capacity there.
The labor costs play a subordinate role in this development because PV production today
is highly automated. For several years, turn-key production lines that produce very good
quality PV modules can be bought off-the-shelf, which enabled fast technology transfer.
Effective laws for feed-in tariffs in Germany and Europe have spurned on massive invest-
ments in PV power plants. Alone in Germany, these amounted to investments of 90 billion
euros through to 2014 [DLR2]. In these countries, however, the economic-political frame-
work is missing for generating investments in production capacity within a competitive
gigawatt scale. Rather, China and other Asian countries have succeeded through the cre-
ation of attractive conditions for investments and credit to mobilize four billion euro in-
vestment capital from national and international sources for the construction of large-
scale production lines.
In spite of the high import quota of PV modules, a large part of the value chain for PV
power plants remains within Germany. Assuming that around 80 percent of PV modules
installed in Germany come from Asia, that these modules comprise roughly 50 percent of
the total PV plant costs (other 40 percent predominantly from inverter and installation
costs) and that initial plant costs make up around 70 percent of the levelized cost of elec-
tricity (remainder: capital costs, maintenance), then nearly 30 percent of the feed-in tariff
goes to Asia for imported modules. Also to consider is that a share of all Asian PV products
are produced on manufacturing equipment made in Germany. In the long term, the falling
costs of PV module manufacturing coupled with increasing freight costs and long delivery
times shall improve the competitive position of manufacturing companies in Germany.
According to a study by EuPD Research, an annual expansion of 10 GW of PV requires

almost 70,000 full-time direct employees, with a focus on installation and maintenance
[EuPD].
9 Are large energy suppliers interested in PV?

The PV capacity operated in Germany is predominantly owned by private individuals, farm-
ers and commercial enterprises (Figure 17). No other power generation technology ena-
bles such a high degree of decentralization and participation. The traditional electricity
suppliers, especially the "big four" (E.ON, RWE, EnBW and Vattenfall), have been reluc-
tant to invest in PV for a very long time. Where did this reluctance come from?
1. Until a few years ago, the electricity production costs for solar power were much
higher than for electricity from other renewable or fossil sources, CO2 emission
costs did not play a role.
2. The electricity consumption in Germany is showing a declining to stable tendency
since 2007. The construction of new PV power plants will force either a reduction
in the utilization rate of existing power plant parks or an increase in electricity
export.
3. Because PV electricity is generated primarily during periods of peak load, conven-
tional peak load power plants are required less often. This reduces their utilization
and profitability in particular. Paradoxically flexible power plants with fast response
times are increasingly in demand for the energy transformation.
4. PV power plants deliver power during the day at times when demand is at a peak
(Figure 47). This lowers the market price of electricity on the EEX, which carries
over to all plants presently producing electricity. (Section 4.3). In the past, the large
power plant operators were therefore able to sell base load electricity at lunchtime
very lucratively. Since 2011, PV led to price reductions on the energy exchange and
thus to dramatic slumps in profit for the “big four”.
5. Because PV power production fluctuates, the slow start-up and shut-down prop-
erties of nuclear of older coal-fired power plants cause difficulties with increasing
PV expansion. One particularly striking example is negative electricity prices on the
market. Coal is being burned and the consumers must pay for the electricity. This
leads to system wear in places where controls are technically feasible but no pro-
vision in the necessary frequency exists.
6. Radically new business models are required for decentralized PV production as
compared to largely centralized coal and nuclear power production. In the wind
sector, especially offshore production, the transformation effect is less drastic.
The annual report for 2019 shows that at the end of 2019, Innogy, a spin-off of RWE,
operated 3.1 GW of wind power plants and 550 MW of other electricity generation plants
based on renewables, including PV.
Vattenfall has sold its German lignite division in Lusatia and intends to concentrate on
electricity from renewables. According to its 2019 annual report, Vattenfall operates 30
MW of PV. E.On transferred its renewables business to RWE in September 2019.
According to its own account, EnBW has refocused its activities in 2013 towards an energy
turnaround. In the 2019 annual report, an installed rated capacity of 1.7 GW for wind
power and 225 MW for other renewable energies including PV in total is stated. In early
2019 EnBW announced plans to build the first PV power plant in Germany without EEG
support. This refers to a 187 MW project in Brandenburg [EnBW]. In the meantime, the
electricity production costs for PV power have fallen to such an extent that energy suppli-
ers have increasingly been building large PV power plants independently of the EEG since
2020.
Figure 17: PV power plant capacity by owner group [AEE3].
Many of the approximately 1000 municipal electricity suppliers in Germany recognized
the challenges facing the energy transformation early on and have reacted by offering
new products and integral concepts, e.g. «virtual power plants” (Figure 18).
Figure 18: Concept for a virtual power plant of the Stadtwerke München (Munich municipal
works) [SWM]
10 Is PV research taking up high levels of funding?
Looking back at previous numbers, Figure 19 shows that it took time for renewable energy
and energy efficiency to become a focal point of energy research.
Figure 19: Germany’s expenditure in the Energy Research Program of the Federal Government by
topic in € million [BMWi6].
In 2019, the German government has invested 1.15 billion euros in energy research.
Almost 100 million euros of this was invested in the funding of photovoltaic research
(Figure 20).
Figure 20: Funding for PV research categorized by technology in € million [BMWi7].
By way of comparison: even after the decision to phase out nuclear power, European
treaties are still forcing Germany to finance the EURATOM program with high double-
digit million amounts each year, in 2019 with around 80 million euros [FÖS3]. Most of
the EURATOM funds are spent on fusion research.
11 Does PV power overload our energy system?
11.1 Transmission and distribution
Most solar power systems in Germany are connected to the decentralized low-voltage
grid (Figure 21) and generate solar power consumption.
As a result, solar power is mainly fed in decentrally and hardly demands to expand the
German national transmission grid. High PV system density in a low voltage grid section
may cause the electricity production to exceed the power consumption in this section on
sunny days¸ due to the high simultaneity factor. Transformers then feed power back into
the medium-voltage grid. At very high plant densities, the transformer station can reach
its power limit. An even distribution of PV installations over the network sections reduces
the need for expansion.
Figure 21: Left: Feed-in of PV power [BSW], Right: Distribution of installed PV power according to
plant size [ISE10]
PV power plants are decentralized and well distributed thereby accommodating the feed-
in and distribution of the existing electricity grid. Large PV power plants or a local accu-
mulation of smaller plants in sparsely populated regions require that the distribution net-
work and the transformer stations are reinforced at certain sites.
The further expansion of PV should be geographically even more consumption-friendly,

in order to simplify the distribution of solar electricity. For example, Brandenburg or Meck-
lenburg-Vorpommern have installed 3 to 4 times more PV power per inhabitant than the
Saarland, NRW, Saxony or Hesse [AEE2].
According to a study by the “Agora Energiewende”, the German electricity grid will be
able to transport the required amounts of electricity even with an installed PV capacity of
just under 100 GWp in 2030 [AGORA1]. In particular, measures to modernize and improve
the use of existing networks are needed, but no significant development.
When there are currently network bottlenecks, PV power is rarely the reason (Figure 22).
Due to surplus wind power in Northern Germany, electricity deficits due to power plant
shutdowns (nuclear in Southern Germany) and a sluggish grid expansion, grid bottlenecks
often occurred in the German transmission grid. Because the grid expansion – a necessary
step to alleviate the bottlenecks – will still take some time, redispatching measures will be
increasingly required in the foreseeable future. Redispatching means that the transmission
operators (TSO) intervene in the market-based operation schedule of the power plants
(dispatch) to redistribute the electricity feed-in, prevent power surges in the grid (preven-
tative redispatch) or to carry out fixes (curative redispatch). Before a bottleneck occurs,
the energy feed-in is reduced (negative redispatch) and afterwards increased (positive re-
dispatch) [BDEW4]. According to provisional figures from the German Federal Network
Agency, a quantity of electricity from renewable energies of 6.5 TWh was regulated in
2019, of which 2.7% was solar power and 96.7% wind power.
Total
Figure 22: Electronically limited electrical energy in GWh/year [BNA]
11.2 Volatility
11.2.1 Solar power production is predictable

Reliable national weather forecasts mean that the generation of solar power can now
accurately be predicted (Figure 23). Because PV power generation is decentralized,
regional changes in cloud cover do not lead to serious fluctuations in PV power production
throughout Germany as a whole.
Figure 23: Actual and predicted hourly generation of power in 2014 [ISE4].
11.2.2 Peak production is significantly lower than installed PV capacity

Due to technical losses (performance ratio PR <= 90%, see section 22.6) and inconsistent
weather conditions, a real generation of electricity above 70% of the installed rated out-
put (see chapter 3) is very unlikely throughout Germany, cf. also Figure 24.
Limiting («feed-in management”) individual plants to 70 percent of their rated power

leads to an estimated loss of revenue of between 2 and 5 percent. A statutory regulation
that actually enforces this limit for small plants came into force in 2012.
11.2.3 Solar and wind energy complement each other

Climate-related high solar radiation and high wind forces in Germany correlate negatively
on all time scales of hours to months.
On an hourly basis, with an installed capacity of 42 GWp of PV and 56 GWp of wind power
at the end of the year, in total only rarely more than 45 GWp of power was connected to
the grid in 2017 (Figure 24).
Figure 24: Average power for the supply of solar and wind power in 2017, 15-minute values [ISE4].
Figure 25 shows the PV and wind power production for Germany in 2017 on an hourly
basis. While the installed capacity of PV and wind at the end of the year was approximately
98 GW, only 3% of the electricity production was above a capacity of 30 GW.
Figure 25: Electricity production of PV and wind in ascending hourly values for the year 2017
Even on a daily basis, the combination of PV and wind power leads to a stabilization of
the yield. While the relative mean absolute deviation of the daily flow production from
the arithmetic mean in 2017 was 58% for PV and 56% for wind, the value for PV and
wind was only 38%.
Figure 26: Monthly production of PV and wind power for 2014 - 2017 [ISE4].Figure 26
shows the monthly values of electricity production from PV, wind power and their total,
as well as the respective linear trend lines for the years 2014 - 2017. The relative deviations
from the trend line for PV and wind in total are significantly lower than for the individual
sectors.
Figure 26: Monthly production of PV and wind power for 2014 - 2017 [ISE4].
11.3 Controllability
With its ever greater capacity, PV increasingly fulfills the role as a stabilizing variable. The
amended EEG dated January 1, 2012 stipulates that feed-in management in the form of
remote control via the grid operator or an automatic cut off at 70 percent of real power
is also performed to regulate plants connected to the low-voltage grid. In accordance with
the Low Voltage Directive VDE AR-N-4105, which has been in force since January 1, 2012,
inverters must perform functions that support the grid.
«...the predominantly decentralized way in which PV is fed into the distribution grid in
close proximity to consumers reduces grid operating costs and in particular those relating
to the transmission grid. A further advantage of feeding in PV is that in addition to feeding
in real power, PV plants are in principle able to offer extra grid services (e.g. local voltage
regulation) at cost-effective prices. They are particularly suitable for integration in subor-
dinate grid management systems and may contribute towards improving grid stability and
quality.” [ISET]
11.4 Conflicts with slow-response fossil and nuclear power plants

The PV power generation profile fits so well to the power grid’s load profile that at all
times Germany’s entire electricity demand, which ranges between 40–80 GW, shall ex-
ceed the PV electricity available, even if PV capacity continues to expand in the coming
years. However, conflicts with slow plant start-up are increasing. Due to the present tech-
nical and economic constraints, these types of power plants react to fluctuating residual
loads only to a very limited extent. The residual load is the difference between the elec-
tricity load and the electricity production from volatile renewable sources (PV, wind, run-
of-river). Older power plants, especially lignite, cannot provide balance energy economi-
cally. Nuclear power plants are technically able to run with a power gradient of up to 2
%/min. and a power increment from 50 % to 100 % [ATW2]. For economic reasons, the
power production was seldom reduced in nuclear plants. In principle, however, volatile
producers with their negligible marginal costs must obtain priority.
These unresolved conflicts can briefly lead to significant overproduction and high electric-
ity exports at low to negative stock market prices, as the example in Figure 28 shows. The
entire week was sunny, with strong winds on Monday and Tuesday. On public holidays
such as May 1st and weekends, the daily load is lower than on working days. Coal and
nuclear power plants delivered electricity even when the price forecast the day before had
negative values.
During past heat waves, the rivers used as cooling reservoirs for fossil fuel and nuclear
power plants became critically warm. The PV installations in Germany were able to help
relax this problem and can also help to reduce this problem in neighboring countries such
as France. Especially during summer, the installed PV in Germany categorically reduces the
load on the fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.
Figure 27: Example showing course of electricity trading price, conventional and renewable elec-
tricity in the 18th calendar week in May 2018 [ISE 4]
11.5 Does volatile solar power endanger security of supply?
No.
The security of supply for final consumers has even increased since 2006 in parallel with
the expansion of photovoltaics (Figure 29). Increased investments in the expansion of
transmission grids have contributed to this development.
Medium Low
voltage voltage
Figure 28: System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) for different network levels in
minutes / year [BNA]
11.6 Does the expansion of PV have to wait for more storage?

No, not in the next few years.
Investing in storage is first profitable when large differences in the electricity price fre-
quently occur, either on the electricity exchange market EEX or at the consumer level.
Currently investments in storage, specifically pumped storage, are even being deferred
because cost-effective operation is not possible.
A continued expansion of PV and wind will first cause prices on the electricity exchange
EEX to sink more often and more drastically. On the other hand, a reduced amount of
nuclear electricity caused by the planned phase out and more expensive electricity from
coal-fired plants due to the imposed CO2 allowances or taxes will result in price increases
on the EEX. This price spread creates the basis for a profitable storage operation. If the
price difference is passed on to the final customer through a tariff structure, then storage
also becomes an interesting alternative for them.
A study by “AGORA Energiewende” identifies 12 measures to modernize the grids to

include among others, approximately 100 GWp of installed PV power by 2030 [AGORA1].
12 Does the manufacture of PV modules consume more energy than
they can produce?
No. The Energy Returned on Energy Invested (ERoEI or EROI) describes the relationship
between the energy provided by a power plant and the energy spent on its construction.
Energy payback time or energy payback time (Energy Payback Time, EPBT) indicates the
amount of time a power plant must run to provide the amount of energy invested.
Harvest factor and energy payback time of PV plants vary with technology and plant lo-
cation. A study by Fraunhofer ISE on PV power plants with current PV technology (mono-
crystalline PERC modules) has determined energy payback times of about one year for
European production and operating sites. With a life span of 25-30 years, this results in
yield factors greater than 20.
Figure 29: Calculated energy payback times of PV power plants for European production and op-
erating sites [ISE10], data: Lorenz Friedrich
13 Is there enough space for PV in Germany?

Yes, without any significant conflicts with agriculture.
When analyzing potentials, a distinction is made between a theoretical, a technical and

an economic-practical, feasible or exploitable potential. The theoretical potential con-
siders the maximum possible implementation of a technology on the basis of the total
supply (physical rough calculation). The technical potential is lower because it takes
basic technical constraints into account (technical rough calculation). The economic-
practical potential takes into account all relevant boundary conditions, in particular legal
(including nature conservation), economic (including infrastructure), sociological (includ-
ing acceptance), as well as competing uses (e.g. solar thermal energy and PV on roofs).
Different sources draw somewhat different boundaries between the categories.
A study commissioned by the German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastruc-
ture estimates the potential for expansion of non-restriction open spaces for PV ground-
mounted systems to 3164 km2 in Germany [BMVI]. With an area consumption of 1.4
ha/MWp according to the current state of the art [ZSW], these areas offer a technical
potential of 226 GWp.
The agricultural area in Germany in 2017 was around 16.7 million hectares (theoretical
potential). Energy crops are grown on 14% of this area (Figure 31), especially for the
production of biogas, biodiesel/vegetable oil and bioethanol [FNR]. With agrivoltaics
(APV), agriculture and electricity production can be combined on the same area
(www.agri-pv.org). A number of crop plants show hardly any loss of yield with reduced
radiation, others even benefit. If the current acreage of these two plant classes in Germany
is assumed to be a technical potential, this corresponds to a nominal output of 1.7 TWp.
APV is already used worldwide on a GW scale. The area currently used for the cultivation
of energy crops (Section 13.1) corresponds to an additional technical potential of 700 GW
nominal PV capacity.
Building envelopes, i.e. roofs and facades offer a technical potential of at least 800 GWp.
Only areas that received at least 500 kWh/(m²a) of radiation were taken into account. PV
modules can not only be mounted on existing flat or pitched roofs, they can also be inte-
grated directly into the building (BIPV). These include PV roof tiles, PV roof sheeting, mod-
ules for cooling facades, thermal insulation composite systems (ETICS) with PV, opaque
and transparent PV insulating glass.
Brown coal mining has destroyed an area of 1773 km2 [UBA4] in Germany, more than
three times the area of Lake Constance (theoretical potential). If one quarter of this area
is flooded and covered with floating PV (FPV) this opens up a technical potential of
55 GWp. Worldwide, more than 1 GWp of floating PV systems is already installed.
A study by the German Federal Environmental Agency assumes 670 km2 of sealed settle-
ment areas [UBA], corresponding to 134 GWp of technical potential for PV installations.
These include structurally characterized settlement areas, but without building and traffic
areas such as roads or railways. Part of this area can be covered with PV modules as a
shade dispenser or covered with special, drivable modules (UPV, from "Urban PV").
Further potential on the GW scale is provided by noise barriers, selected traffic areas, track
bodies (RIPV, from "Road Integrated PV") and in perspective the roofs of electric vehicles
(VIPV, from Vehicle Integrated PV").
Figure 30: Applications for the integration of photovoltaic
Whatever part of the technical potential is economically and practically usable depends
on complex economic, regulatory and technical constraints, in addition to questions of
acceptance. In general, integrated PV - which merges with the shell of buildings, traffic
routes and vehicles, or uses areas together with agriculture or water surfaces in flooded
opencast mines - will have slightly higher electricity generation costs than simple open-
space power plants. For this purpose, integrated PV avoids conflicts of land usage and
creates synergies by replacing a building façade, using the substructure of a noise barrier
or increasing the range of electric vehicles.
13.1 Do electricity and food production compete on arable land?

No. Firstly, food and electricity can be produced on the same land, and secondly, no food
at all is grown on 78% of the agricultural land in Germany.
Agrivoltaics (APV) uses land simultaneously for agricultural crop production (photosynthe-
sis) and PV electricity production (photovoltaics). APV covers a broad spectrum in the in-
tensity of agriculture and the additional expenditure for PV plant construction. It ranges
from intensive arable farming with special PV mounting systems to extensively used grass-
land, where the PV side needs to be marginally adapted with a high potential for ecosys-
tem services. APV increases space efficiency and enables a massive increase in PV capacity.
Fertile arable land is preserved for agriculture and species-rich biotopes can be created on
poor soils.
Energy crops are grown on 14% of this agricultural area (Figure 31), especially for the
production of biogas, biodiesel/vegetable oil and bioethanol [FNR]. Comparing the effi-
ciency of land use for electricity production, PV power plants perform better than energy
crops by a factor of 40. Silage maize, which is cultivated in Germany on an area of about
1 million hectares, yields 18 MWhel/ha [FNR2], compared to 700 MWhel/ha for PV in usual
southern orientation. The emission factors of electricity generation from biogas or bio-
methane range from 164 -188 g CO2-eq/kWh. With PV, the figure is approx. 65 g CO2
eq/kWh [UBA7], which shows that PV performs better by a factor of 2-3.
Figure 31: Land use in Germany [FNR]
13.2 Do PV systems destroy ecologically valuable areas?

No, quite the opposite.
If an area is taken out of intensive agriculture, e.g. energy crop cultivation, converted into
grassland and a ground mounted PV system is installed on it, then biodiversity increases
in principle [ESD]. In ground mounted PV system, no fertilizer is used, so that less demand-
ing plants have a chance. The fencing of a ground mounted PV system protect the area
against unauthorized access and free-range dogs, which is good for ground breeders,
among other aspects. Further improvements can be achieved by making small adjust-
ments to the PV system. Enlarged row spacing of the module tables, slightly elevated
mounting of the modules, sowing of wild plant mixtures instead of grass monoculture
and careful maintenance of the greenery create a biotope solar park.
14 Do PV power plants find acceptance in the population?
Yes. The free scalability of PV power plants enables decentralized expansion, even down
to so-called "balcony modules" ("plug-in PV") with a few hundred watts rated power.
The high number of more than 1.7 million PV systems in Germany, of which about 60%
are small systems with outputs below 10 kW, shows that extensive use is made of these
technical possibilities.
According to a representative survey by Lichtblick, solar systems are among the most pop-
ular power plants [Licht2]. Figure 32 shows the distribution of the answers to the question
"If you think of the construction of new plants for energy generation in Germany: What
types of plants should the focus be on?”
Figure 32: Results of the survey on the construction of new power plants, data from [Licht2]
Also from a residents' perspective, PV power plants are by far the most popular power
plants, according to a survey by the Renewable Energy Agency (Figure 32). The popularity
increases when such power plants in their own neighborhood are practically experienced.
RE plants in general
Solar parks
Wind energy plants
Biomass plants
Gas power station
Coal Power Station
Nuclear power plant
Figure 33: Survey results on the acceptance of different types of power plants [AEE4]
From the point of view of non-privileged electricity consumers, the acceptance of PV ex-
pansion is less favorable. This is not surprising, since the design of the EEG allocation
mechanism means that predominantly private households and smaller companies have to
bear the costs of the energy transformation (see Section 4).
15 Are PV plants in Germany efficient?

The efficiency of PV systems as energy converters is comparatively low, but the sun shines
for free.
The nominal efficiency (see section 24.2) of commercial wafer-based PV modules (i.e.
modules with silicon solar cells) in new production has increased in the last few years by
approx. 0.3 percentage points per year to average values of about 20% [ITRPV]. They
provide a nominal output of 200 W; top-class modules are 10% above this value.
Since additional losses occur during operation, PV plants do not actually operate at nom-
inal module efficiency. These effects are combined in the performance ratio (PR). A well-
designed PV plant installed today achieves a PR of 80–90 percent throughout the year.
This takes into account all losses incurred as a result of higher operating temperature,
varying irradiance conditions, dirt on the solar modules, line resistance, conversion losses
in the inverter and downtime. Inverters convert the direct current (DC) generated by the
modules to alternating current (AC) for grid feed-in. The efficiency of new PV inverters
currently stands close to 98 percent.
In 2018, the average household electricity consumption for electrical appliances, lighting,
hot water (for hygienic purposes) and domestic heating was 1.6 MWh per household
member [DESTATIS]. Average values for 1-person households are slightly higher per cap-
ita, for multi-person households significantly lower. On average, PV roof systems achieve
910 full load hours [TSO] (Section 15.3.). From a south-facing and moderately inclined
roof surface of a house, 22 m2 are thus sufficient to generate an amount of electricity
with 12 PV modules of 360 W, which corresponds to the average annual electricity de-
mand of a family (4 MWh).
To increase yield, PV modules are optimally tilted on flat roofs and open land to achieve
the highest yield. Tilted south-facing modules, positioned at suitable distance from one
another to prevent shading, require an area approximately 2 to 2.5 times of their own
surface area. For the year 2019, an average area requirement of 1.4 ha per megawatt of
installed capacity was determined for ground-mounted systems, with a strong decreasing
trend [ZSW].
In comparison, when converting energy crops into electricity, the efficiency value calcu-
lated on the basis of irradiance is significantly less than one percent. This amount falls
further when organic fossil fuels such as coal, oil or natural gas are converted into elec-
tricity. The efficiency of combustion-based power plants is based on the chemical energy
which already exists in fossil fuels. Based on this method of calculation, Germany’s coal-
fired power plants report an average efficiency value of 38 percent, for example. Burning
biofuels in vehicles results in modest efficiencies in relation to the irradiated energy and
land use.
A passenger car with a diesel combustion engine, which consumes 5.5 l of biodiesel per
100 km, can cover about 32,000 km with the annual yield of a 1 hectare rape field. With
the annual yield of a PV system of the same area, a battery electric vehicle (electric car,
consumption 16 kWh per 100 km) drives about 4.3 million km, the range is higher by a
factor of 133.
While southern Spain and North Africa are able to produce specific yields of up to
1600 kWh/kWp, the power transmission to Germany would result in energy losses and
additional charges. With 800 kV high-voltage lines, line losses can be reduced to about
0.5 % per 100 km. Not taking conversion losses into account, high-voltage direct current
(HVDC) transmission lines reduce transportation losses to just under 0.3 percent per
100 kilometers. Based on this, an HVDC transmission line of 5000 kilometers in length
would present transmission losses of around 14 percent.
15.1 Do PV plants degrade?

Yes, albeit very slowly. Wafer-based PV modules age so slowly that detecting any output
losses poses a challenge to scientists.
A study by Fraunhofer ISE of 44 larger, quality-tested rooftop systems in Germany has

shown an average annual degradation of the nominal output of about 0.15% [ISE2]. In
this context, the common assumption that plants experience annual output losses of
0.5 percent seems conservative. Typically, the manufacturers guarantee holds for a period
of 20 to 25 years and in some cases even 30 years, ensuring a maximal linear power loss
of e.g. 20 % within this period.
The above figures do not take into account any losses arising as a result of manufacturing
faults. The indicated rated power of modules normally refers to output following this ini-
tial degradation. Comprehensive tests conducted by Fraunhofer ISE have shown that light-
induced degradation (LID) of between one and two percent occurs during the first few
days of operation depending on the material used in the solar cells.
Long-term data has not been collected for many types of thin-film modules. Depending
on the type, degradation during the first few months of operation and seasonal fluctua-
tions can be observed.
15.2 Can PV modules become soiled?

Yes, but any dirt that accumulates on the vast majority of plants in Germany is generally
washed away the next time that it rains, so that virtually no yield losses occur. Problems
only arise in modules installed at extremely shallow angles (approx. 10° and less) or those
located in the vicinity of deciduous trees or sources of dust. In regions that are increasingly
suffering from drought due to climate change, it may be worthwhile to clean the modules
from time to time.
15.3 Do PV plants often operate at full capacity?

No. Due to the fluctuating and cyclical solar irradiation patterns, PV plants actually operate
for less than half of the 8760 total hours per year, and even when they are operating, the
system generally operates at partial load.
The performance indicator «full-load hours” or "full hours of use" is the quotient of the
actual energy generated by a power plant in the space of a year and its rated power (see
section 24.3). Based on a trend scenario, the transmission system operators (TSOs) assume
980 full load hours on a multi-year average for PV ground-mounted systems in Germany
and 910 hours per annum for roof-mounted systems with less optimal southern orienta-
tion [ÜNB]. Figure 34 gives the forecasted full load hours per annum for different renew-
able energy systems in Germany.
The complete overview of the forecasts for electricity generation from RE, adjusted for
loss quantities due to feed-in management (Section 11.1), is shown in Figure 34. Due to
the low full utilization hours, growing shares of solar electricity in the grid increasingly
require accompanying measures (Section 18).
Figure 34: Forecasted hours of full-load operation for renewable energy generation in 2020, data
from [ÜNB]
The average annual sum of horizontal global irradiance in Germany for the years 1998-
2018 is 1088 kWh/m2/a with a linear trend of +0.3% per year according to figures from
the German Weather Service. Figure 35 shows the irradiance distribution across Germany
for an earlier period, with an average annual sum of 1055 kWh/m2 at that time. In order
to maximize yields, PV modules are oriented facing south and are installed with a tilt angle
30–40° to the horizontal. This increases the average incident irradiation to roughly 1250
kWh/m2 per year throughout Germany.
A performance ratio PR (see section 24.6) of 85 percent and an ideal orientation would
result in a geographical average across Germany of more than 1060 full-load hours. Since
some roof-mounted systems are not ideally oriented and many still have a PR of less than
85 percent, the actual average number of full-load hours is somewhat lower. Technical
improvements in the module and installation can increase the incident irradiation, the
performance ratio PR, the yield and thus the number of full-load hours of a PV system.
The improvements entail:
• Tracking (see section 18.3.1)

• Bifacial PV technology
• Reducing losses caused by shading
• Reducing the temperature coefficient of the solar cells
• Reducing the operating temperature of the module by backside ventilation
• Increasing the module properties for weak light and askance light conditions
• Reducing module losses caused by snow cover and soiling
• Early detection and repair of reduced output
• Decrease degradation over the module lifetime
In wind power plants, the greater the hub height, the greater the number of full-load
hours. When required, nuclear, coal and gas-fired power plants are capable of working
almost continuously (one year = 8760 hours) at their rated power, as far as there is suffi-
cient cooling water available.
Figure 35: Horizontal annual global irradiation in Germany averaged over 1981-2010
16 Does PV make relevant contributions to climate protection?
16.1 Do anthropogenic CO2 emissions danger the climate?
Yes. Most experts see a substantial risk.
Increasing global warming has been proven beyond doubt [IPCC]. Compared to the pre-
industrial age, the mean global temperature has risen by 0.8° C [IEA2]. The vast majority
of the scientific community believe that anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and other green-
house gases significantly increase the growth of atmospheric greenhouse gas concentra-
tions and, moreover, cause the increase of the average global temperature to become
extremely likely. In May 2013, the atmospheric CO2 concentration reached 400 ppm for
the first time in 800,000 years.
Figure 36 and
Figure 37 show the development through today of the atmospheric CO2 concentration
and the global or Antarctic temperature to date.
Figure 36: Development of the atmospheric CO2 concentration and the mean global temperature
change based on the NASA Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index [IEA2].
A more rapid increase in global temperature dangers the stability of the global climate
system to an extent that is not fully understood today. The temperature increase has far-
reaching effects on the global food security, coastal settlements, diversity of species and
numerous habitats.
Figure 37: Estimate of the atmospheric CO2 concentration and the temperature in Antarctica based
on ice core data [EPA], added two recent readings from Mauna Loa Observatory for CO2 concen-
tration [https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/data.html]
16.2 Does PV make a significant contribution to reducing the CO2 emissions?
Yes.
While PV systems do not release CO2 during operation, a holistic view must also take into
account the manufacture of the system and its disposal. If one considers the life cycle of
a photovoltaic roof system operated in Germany, plausible estimates lie between approx.
50 (Figure 38, [EnAg]) and 67 g CO2 eq./KWh solar power [UBA7]. With the spread of
new technologies such as diamond wire saws, greenhouse gas emissions from PV pro-
duction have decreased significantly in the recent past.
Figure 38: Average CO2 equivalent emissions of various power generation technologies [EnAg]
By expanding RE, the CO2 emission factor for electricity generation in Germany could be
reduced to 474 g CO2/kWh by 2018 (Figure 39).
The expansion of RES has reduced the CO2 emission factor for the German electricity mix
from 764 g CO2/kWh in 1990 to 474 g CO2/kWh in 2018 (Figure 38). The emission factor
describes the ratio of the direct CO2 emissions of the entire German electricity generation
(including electricity export) to the net to electricity consumption in Germany [UBA6].
Figure 39: Specific and absolute CO2 emissions of electricity generation in Germany [UBA6]
In 2019, the use of PV in Germany avoided a net 29.2 million tons of greenhouse gas
emissions (Figure 40), i.e. approx. 615 g/kWh of PV electricity from 47.5 TWh of generated
electricity. In the calculations, the emissions from the production of PV system compo-
nents were taken into account approximately [UBA7].
Germany’s energy policy has influence on a global scale. With a production volume of
171 million tonnes in 2016, Germany was the number 1 international lignite mining com-
pany, ahead of China. Although less than three percent of the global electricity consump-
tion was due to Germany (with consumption showing a downward trend), German policy
makers are leading the way in terms of developing incentive programs for RE. The EEG is
the best example of this. The EEG and its effect have been closely observed around the
world. It has been used by dozens countries as a model for similar regulations. Meanwhile,
China is leading in expanding its PV capacity and has surpassed Germany in annual in-
stalled power many times over.
Figure 40: Greenhouse gas emissions avoided by using renewable energy in 2019 [UBA1]
The International Energy Agency (IEA) commends the EEG in their report «Deutschland
2013” as a very effective instrument for expansion, which has drastically reduced the costs
for renewable energy production in the last years [IEA3]. Meanwhile, Germany’s break
with nuclear energy has also caught people’s attention worldwide. An additional five Eu-
ropean countries also have decided to phase out nuclear energy (Belgium, Switzerland,
Spain) while other countries have already completed the phase-out (Italy, Lithuania).
In terms of avoiding CO2 emissions, the EEG achieved the highest impact due to a side
effect: The creation of the largest and most secure sales market for PV, which lasted many
years and decidedly accelerated global expansion, technology development and price re-
duction (Figure 41). Worldwide PV is reducing the use of fossil fuels for electricity produc-
tion.
Figure 41: Development of annually installed PV capacity for Germany and the Rest of World,
(RoW), figures from EPIA , IHS, Solar Power Europe, with forecast for 2021.
The German EEG has made PV power affordable faster, also extending out to people in
developing countries. In this context, the EEG is «possibly the most successful develop-
ment program of all time when it comes to energy supply,” says Bodo Hombach in the
“Handelsblatt” newspaper on January 11, 2013, and also helps developing countries to
save significant amounts of CO2.
16.3 In addition to CO2 are there other environmentally harmful gases released
during the production of PV?
Yes, in the case of some thin film technologies.
During the production of thin-film PV and flat screens, nitrogen trifluoride (NF3) is still
used, in part, to clean the coating systems. Residues of this gas can thereby escape into
the atmosphere. NF3 is more than 17,000 times as harmful to the environment as carbon
dioxide. Current emission quantities are not known. As of 2013, however, NF3 emissions
are to be determined in 37 countries according to the revised Kyoto Protocol.
16.4 Do dark PV modules warm up the Earth through their absorption?

Solar radiation plays an important role in the Earth’s energy balance. Light-colored sur-
faces reflect a larger amount of incident solar radiation into the atmosphere, while dark
surfaces absorb more sunlight causing the Earth to heat up.
PV module installation alters the degree of reflection (albedo) of the ground on which the
system is mounted. For example, the total thermal output of a PV module with 17 percent
efficiency emits as much heat (locally) as an area with an albedo of ca. 20 percent. (To
compare, asphalt has an albedo of 15 percent, meadow below 20 percent, and the desert
ca. 30 percent (http://wiki.bildungsserver.de/klimawandel/index.php /Albedo). In consid-
eration of the relatively low amount of area required by PV modules (Section 13), the
albedo effect is marginal. Furthermore, PV electricity use replaces the power from fossil
fuel plants, reduces carbon emissions and thus slows down the greenhouse effect.
17 Are PV systems capable of replacing fossil fuel and nuclear

power plants?
No, not in the near future.
PV and wind power may currently be capable of reducing the use of fossil fuels, im-
ported energy consumption and CO2 emissions but until considerable storage capacities
for electricity or hydroelectric storage facilities are available in the grid, they are not ca-
pable of replacing capacities. Calm, dull winter days, when power consumption can
reach a maximum and no solar or wind power is available, present the most critical test.
Despite this, PV and wind power are increasingly colliding with conventional power
plants with slow start-up and shut-down processes (nuclear, old lignite power plants).
These power plants, which are almost only capable of covering the base load, must be
replaced by flexible power plants as quick as possible. The preferred power plant choice
is multifunctional electrically powered CHP plants fitted with thermal storage systems
(Section 18.3.6).
18 Are we capable of covering a significant proportion of our energy

demand with PV power?
Yes, to the extent that we adapt our energy system and the energy-related structures to
the requirements of the energy transformation.
18.1 Energy demand and supply

The traditional energy industry promotes fossil and nuclear energy sources (primary en-
ergy), converts them and prepares them for end users (Figure 42).
Figure 42: Energy flow diagram 2019 for Germany in petajoules [AGEB].
There are dramatic efficiency deficits in conversion and final energy consumption (cf. Sec-
tion 18.3.3). Our future energy demand is by no means the same as today's primary en-
ergy consumption, neither in terms of quantities nor in terms of energy carriers.
Until now, Germany has been highly dependent on energy imports (Figure 43), associated
with the risk of volatile prices, political interference by mining and transit countries, and
the risk of disruptions in raw material logistics, for example due to low water in rivers.
Net import rate 2016

(based on the primary
Fuels
energy consumption)
Brown coal -1.9 %

Hard coal 94.1 %
Uranium 100 %
Mineral oil 100 %
Natural gas 91.2 %
Figure 43: Germany’s import quotas for fossil and nuclear energy sources
(www.umweltbundesamt.de)
The costs of energy imports are shown in Figure 44, minus their import revenues, which
are around 50-100 billion euros per year. Much of the money goes to autocratic regimes.
Figure 44: Cost development for the provision of primary energy in Germany [ÖKO3]
The majority of final energy (39 percent) is used to generate mechanical energy (force) for
vehicles and stationary engines (Figure 45). For space heating and hot water, about 800
TWh of final energy is used annually [BMWi1].
Final energy consumption [TWh]
Mechanical energy
Space heating
Hot water
Process heat
Air cooling
Process cooling
ICT
Lighting
Figure 45: Share of final energy in Germany, categorized by utilization 2017, Figures by [BMWi1]
The electricity load fluctuates periodically: more electricity is needed during the day than
at night, and on weekdays more than on weekends and public holidays. Electricity pro-
viders differentiate in the load profile between basic, medium and peak load, see Section
24.7. The base load is the load share of 30-40 GW, which barely changes over 24 hours.
The intermediate load fluctuates slowly and predominantly periodically, the peak load
comprises the rapidly changing load portion above the basic and intermediate load.
Electricity consumption and the energy needed for hot water is slightly lower in summer
than in winter. The petroleum sales (petrol and diesel fuel) show very low seasonal fluc-
tuations [MWV]. The heating demand correlates negatively with global irradiance, with
the highest point of intersection being found in spring.
18.2 Energy scenarios
Figure 46: Schematic representation of the REMod model [ISE12]
Our current energy system in Germany, which is based on generating power from fossil
fuel and nuclear sources, cannot survive in the long term. A variety of energy scenarios
have been created for the coming decades, and they are increasingly incorporating the
use of RE [UBA, ACA, ISE12]. Researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy
Systems ISE have used simulations, based on hourly time series and taking into account
sector coupling, to investigate various transformation paths to a renewable energy system
for Germany (Figure 46). The goal was to reduce the energy-related CO2 emissions by 95-
100% compared to the reference year 1990. In an economically optimized generation
mix, the PV contributes with an installed capacity of 300-645 GW depending on the
boundary conditions [ISE12].
Figure 47 shows a schematic residual load curve for Germany with a 100% renewable
power supply. Shown are the descending ordered hourly values of the residual load (sec-
tion 11.4) for one year. Volatile power production can be limited at any time technically,
but at the price of an economic loss of power of the corresponding amount of electricity.
An electricity price with a reasonable tax function would fall from left to right along the
residual load curve in Figure 47.
Figure 47: Schematic representation of a residual load curve for Germany with power supply with
100% EE, with generators (+) and loads (-)
On the demand side, flexible loads are reduced, batteries and pumped storage are dis-
charged, fuel cells, steam turbines, gas and steam generators (CCGT) and gas turbines
are activated in the order of their marginal costs to cover the residual load. Hydrogen or
methane, produced with EE, is used as an energy source. When there is local demand for
heat, power generators are designed with combined heat and power (CHP) and produce
usable waste heat. CHP gas turbines provide high-temperature heat for industrial pro-
cesses.
On the surplus side, flexible loads are increased, batteries and pumped storage are
loaded, electrolysers, heat pumps and resistance heating ("heating elements") are acti-
vated when electricity prices are falling in order to decrease the electricity that is not cur-
rently required. Electrolysers can also be operated as CHP systems and produce usable
waste heat. Resistance heaters and high-temperature heat pumps can supply heat for
industrial processes. Ultima ratio is the regulation of electricity production, if the installed
purchase capacity or the network capacities are not sufficient for a few hours of the year.
In order to be able to operate heat-generating converters (Figure 47) on both sides of the
curve in a current-regulated manner, they require thermal storage and heat consumers
close to the location or a connection to heat networks (Section 18.3.6). Generators (eg
simple gas turbines) and consumers (eg resistance heating systems) with particularly low
performance-related investment and reserve costs (€ / W) are needed for the two-sided
extensions of the residual load curve. Being rarely in operation, they do not have to be
highly efficient.
The electrolytically generated hydrogen can be stored directly or after methanation in

pressure tanks or in the gas network. From there, a back-flow takes place (gas turbine,
CHP, fuel cell), a further processing to synthetic fuels or a material use in the chemical
industry.
The storage capacity of the system must be designed for the worst case of a primary
energy failure (sun and wind) lasting several weeks, i.e. a prolonged winter slack, possibly
worsened by a closed snow cover. For this, sufficient quantities of hydrogen and derived
synthetic energy sources and feedstocks must be kept on hand. If there were no wind
power support for PV, the worst case would last months, not weeks, in winter, and it
would require many times more storage capacity. Because of their limited capacity, sta-
tionary batteries and pumped storage fail relatively quickly (minutes to a few hours) as
power suppliers in continuous operation. The same applies to vehicle batteries, which
can be operated bidirectionally on the grid but must primarily meet mobility needs. The
benefit of these storage systems lies in the frequent change of operation between charg-
ing and discharging, which they implement more quickly and, above all, more energy-
efficiently compared with the power-to-power path via hydrogen. Many load manage-
ment options also only have a short effect in the hourly range.
The power generation capacity of the system on the left side of Figure 47 must be
sufficient to take over the entire supply in the order of 100-150 GW when the hourly
reserves (load management, pumped storage, battery) are exhausted. This situation oc-
curs frequently for example on nights with little wind and may in some cases last over
several weeks (see above).
The power consumption of the system on the right side of Figure 47 in the order of
several 100 GW must be sufficient to largely absorb the production of electricity from
volatile RE minus the current power consumption. The power consumption starts as soon
as the capacity of the hourly reserves (load management, pumped storage, battery) has
been exhausted. This requires, among other things, an electrolysis capacity in the range
of 50-120 GW [ISE12]. If the power consumption is insufficient for rare production peaks,
power generation must be regulated. This can happen, for example, on stormy nights or
on sunny and at the same time very windy weekend days, when low demand and very
high electricity production come together. For these few operating hours, no further ex-
pansion of the acceptance performance is worthwhile.
Converter, that allow a reversible operation work on both sides of the curve in Figure 47
and thus achieve a higher utilization. In addition to batteries and pumped storage, this
also includes reversible fuel cells that are operated as electrolysers when there is an excess
of electricity. They are currently under development.
Converters that allow reversible operation operate on both sides of the curve in Figure 47
and achieve high utilization. In addition to batteries, this also includes reversible fuel cells
that can operate electrolysis in the event of excess electricity. The technologies and
measures mentioned in Figure 47 are scalable, with the exception of turbines and pumped
storage. They can not only be operated centrally on a multi-MW scale, but also on a single-
digit kW scale. Appropriate devices are commercially available as domestic technology.
A quick glance at global energy scenarios: The study "Shell Scenarios Sky - Meeting the
goals of the Paris Agreement" by Shell International B.V. from March 2018 considers PV
to be the world's most important source of renewable energy (Figure 48). Global electric-
ity consumption will rise from 22 PWh today to 100 PWh in 2100.
Figure 48: Development of global power generation by technologies in the Sky-Scenario; the di-
ameter of the pie charts corresponds to the global power requirement [Shell]
The International Energy Agency (IEA) has been publishing scenarios for the worldwide
expansion of PV (
Figure 49) for years and reliably underestimates the actual development (black curve). IEA
expects that the worldwide installed PV output will overtake wind power in 2020, hydro-
power in 2027, coal power in 2032, gas power in 2035 and reach an order of magnitude
of over 3 TW by 2040 [IEA5].
Figure 49: Forecasts of IEA since 2006 and actual development of global annual PV construction
[Carb]
18.3 Transformation measures

Despite there being no hard and fast rules for integrating intermittent PV power into our
energy system on a large scale and in an economically as well as technologically feasible
manner, a plethora of complementary measures exist that are suitable for this very pur-
pose. The following sections examine the most important aspects of this in detail.
18.3.1 Keeping PV power production constant

How can we keep the PV power supply constant in the grid?
A constant level in the daily run increases the full load hours of a PV power plant and
reduces the need for compensation, for example through load management and batter-
ies. One of the simplest approaches is the installation of roof- and ground-mounted PV
modules with east/west orientation (Figure 48). This type of installation reduces the area
consumption, but the specific annual yield per installed module capacity decreases com-
pared with the south orientation. Single and dual-axis tracking systems not only make
power production more constant throughout the day (Figure 48), they also increase the
specific annual yield by approx. 15-30%. Compared to stationary systems, they can also
reduce yield losses caused by snow cover or increased operating temperatures. Another
option is vertically mounted, bifacial modules with north-south gradient, which provide
more electricity in the morning and afternoon than at noon.
Figure 50: Yield development throughout the course of a day of PV plants installed in a variety
of different ways, calculated using the software PVsol on a predominantly clear day in July in
Freiburg, Germany.
The very pronounced seasonal fluctuation in PV power generation can be minimized by

mounting south-facing modules with higher angles of inclination (Figure 50). As a result,
the electricity yield in the winter half-year increased slightly, but at the cost of larger losses
in the summer and in the total yield (in the calculation example -6%).
Figure 51: Calculation example for the specific monthly yield of a PV system at Freiburg for south-
oriented modules with 30° inclination (maximum annual yield) and 60° inclination.
The slightly higher costs of electricity production for the alternative installation variants
mentioned above can already be amortized in the context of increased self-consumption
and the associated savings in electricity purchases, especially for commercial customers.
Feed-in tariffs, which reward a higher value of electricity in the morning and evening
hours, promote the construction of systemically advantageous PV power plants, which
are not only optimized for maximum annual electricity yield. The measures to increase the
number of full-load hours mentioned in section 15.3 also contribute to the stability of the
PV electricity supply.
18.3.2 Complementary operation of power plants

It is technically possible to operate, design or retrofit many fossil fuel power plants in a
way that they are able to follow the residual load (Figure 52). Partial load operation, in-
creased wear and any associated retrofitting increases the power production costs.
Gas-fired power plants, in particular, are highly suitable to cover fluctuating loads. In com-
bination with combined heat and power systems (CHP), natural gas power plants have a
very high efficiency of 95 % [UBA2]. Simple gas power plants have only a fraction of the
investment costs (€/kW) of combined cycle (gas and steam) power plants (CCPP).
Today, gas-fired power plants burn natural gas and biogas. Most of the natural gas must
be imported (about 95% in 2017 [AGEB1]), in particular, Russia and Norway deliver to
Germany. As part of the energy transformation, gas power plants will switch from natural
gas to mixed gases with increasing proportions of electrolytically generated hydrogen.
Figure 52: Power plant availability [VGB].
Depending on the type, biomass power plants can burn solid biomass (waste wood), liquid
biomass (vegetable oil) or biogas (from agriculture or sewage treatment plants). At the
end of 2019 biomass power plants with 8 GWp output were installed across Germany
[ISE4]. Power plants that burn solid or liquid biomass can be operated very easily guided
due to the simple storage of fuel. Restrictions exist in biogas power plants, if the fermen-
tation throughput can only be controlled to a limited extent and also the gas cannot be
stored in the gas network. An agricultural cultivation of biomass for the purpose of ener-
getic usage will decrease due to the low efficiency of area, the usage will concentrate on
residues of agriculture. Economically, a complementary partial load operation is feasible
if the feed-in tariff rises at times of increased electricity demand.
Power plants for complementary operation must meet the following criteria:
• high efficiency, also in partial load operation
• fast load changes
• increasing hydrogen percentage in gas-fired power plants
• decreasing shares of biomass from associated agricultural cultivation
18.3.3 Increasing the energy efficiency
18.3.3.1 Traffic
Most of the final energy consumed in traffic is converted into waste heat by combustion
engines; only a small part reaches the drive train as mechanical energy. Diesel engines for
passenger cars achieve an efficiency of up to approx. 42% at their best, while in urban
traffic the average efficiency is only approx. 20% due to partial load operation [Sprin].
The values for gasoline engines in passenger cars are even lower, at up to 37% at the
peak and approx. 10-15% in city traffic. Particularly in urban traffic, a considerable portion
of the drive energy gained is irreversibly wasted during braking, because vehicles with
internal combustion engines can hardly recuperate via their alternators. Thus, motorized
road transport burns fossil fuels with a very low efficiency in relation to the transport
performance.
Electric vehicle drives use highly efficient motors with an effective efficiency of around
90%. Losses during charging of the vehicle battery are in the order of 15% and are par-
ticularly high during fast (DC) charging. Electric vehicle drives can recover a large propor-
tion of kinetic energy; according to the manufacturer, the efficiency of recuperation for
the BMW i3, for example, is around 63%. For reasons of energy efficiency alone, it makes
sense to switch to electric drives, in addition to the considerable storage potential (Section
18.3.7.6).
Figure 53 shows the complete greenhouse gas emissions of a battery electric vehicle (BEV)
with a 35 kWh battery over the mileage for mixed urban/rural use, compared with a gas-
oline and a diesel car, with 3 variants for the electricity mix.
Figure 53: Greenhouse gas emissions of today's compact-class vehicles as a function of mileage
[AGORA2]
Preferred charging with solar power (or wind power) leads to a particularly flat course of
the BEV emission line (yellow). If the BEV is purchased together with a small PV system of
3 kWp nominal power, the vehicle runs on 100% solar power, with an average annual
mileage of over 15000 km, a specific annual yield of 950 kWh/kWp and 15% charging
losses. Considering pure city driving with typical stop-and-go operation, consumption and
GHG emissions per km decrease for BEVs thanks to recuperation, while they increase for
internal combustion vehicles due to braking losses and inefficient partial load operation.
For city driving, smaller batteries of e.g. 15-20 kWh capacity are usually sufficient, which
further reduces GHG emissions for production and operation.
Recent studies show an interim reduction of battery-related GHG emissions to values of

61-106 kg CO2-eq/kWh battery capacity [IVL], compared to the 145 kg CO2-eq/kWh from
2017 on which Figure 53 is based. In perspective, the production of BEVs will use increas-
ing shares of RE with correspondingly decreasing GHG emissions.
18.3.3.2 Households
Private households consume about 75% of final energy for heating. This consumption
can be halved by simple thermal insulation measures. The German consumer organization
Stiftung Warentest has determined that a household completely equipped with old appli-
ances consumes twice as much electricity as one that uses only efficient appliances [Test].
Especially effective are measures that reduce the nighttime electricity consumption, when
solar power (and in windless nights even wind power) can be provided only via compara-
tively costly storage.
18.3.4 Load management

Demand side management aims at a supply-oriented, temporal shift of electricity con-
sumption. When the residual load is high (section 11.4), consumption is temporarily re-
duced or stopped; when the residual load is low, demand is made up.
Requirements for load management are flexibility options through material storage or
reserves on the demand side. A washing machine can often wait a few hours or even
days, while a passenger train must depart on time. In addition, electrical systems in con-
tinuous operation require power reserves that allow a compensating increase above
normal power after a reduction below normal power. Energy storage systems are consid-
ered in Section 18.3.7. They are charged in a way that serves the grid (e.g., pumped-
storage power plants) or at least takes grid service into account (in the future, e.g., car
batteries).
Several studies have identified load management potentials in the order of 20 GW and
more for private households and up to 14 GW for commercial consumers [AEE1]. House-
hold appliances, whose operation is allowed to start with a delay in a defined time interval
according to the user's decision, must be technically enabled to wait for grid-serving op-
erating times. The electricity supplier can offer time-based tariffs for this purpose, but
direct control is even more effective. Some appliances with particularly high output, such
as washing machines, dishwashers and tumble dryers, could be considered for this.
For the most part, the technical prerequisites and economic incentives for tapping this
potential have yet to be created. Dynamic electricity tariffs and electricity meters that en-
able time-based billing ("smart meters") are of crucial importance. In the best case, dy-
namic tariffs reflect the current residual load. The current composition of electricity prices
for households (Figure 12), with very high fixed costs per kWh, would hardly create in-
centives for load management given the usual price fluctuations on the electricity ex-
change. According to the EU Electricity Market Directive 2019/944, end customers with
smart meters should be able to choose dynamic electricity tariffs from Jan. 1, 2021.
In electricity-intensive industry, for example electrolytic aluminum production, there is also

potential for adjusting consumption profiles. Companies that accept temporary power
cuts in electricity supply announced at short notice can already receive a contractually
agreed compensation payment from their transmission system operator (Verordnung über
abschaltbare Lasten – AbLaV, Ordinance on Disconnectable Loads). The electrolytic pro-
duction of green hydrogen as a raw material for metallurgy, e.g. for the direct reduction
of iron ore, and the chemical industry, e.g. via methanation and ammonia synthesis, will
also contribute to load management.
As soon as particularly cheap daily electricity is available more frequently, because the
installed PV capacity grows and variable electricity tariffs are offered, flexibility on the part
of industry and consumers will also increase. Self-consumption of solar power has an
analogous effect to dynamic electricity tariffs because it significantly reduces the price of
electricity when purchased directly from one's own roof. Promoting PV self-consumption
for households and businesses is a highly effective means of incentivizing load manage-
ment.
18.3.5 Balanced expansion of PV and wind power capacities

In Germany, weather patterns show a negative correlation between the PV and onshore
wind power generated on both the hourly and monthly scales. If it is possible to keep the
installed capacities for PV and wind power on the same scale, their combination reduces
the need for equalization.
In terms of hourly fluctuations, the total amount of electricity generated from PV and
onshore wind rarely exceeds 50 percent of the total rated power. If you upscale the PV
and wind power installed in 2017 with their hourly power production to 200 GWp each,
then the production curve from Figure 54 results.
Figure 54: Fictitious annual electricity production (8760 hours) for 200 GWp PV and 200 GWp wind,
extrapolated on the basis of installation and yield data for 2017
In the dark and low wind, the production is close to 0. The amount of energy above 200
GW is below 1 per thousand, above 150 per cent below 1 per cent. If one ignores these
storm peaks and one assumes a base load of at least 50 GW, then a bandwidth of approx.
100 GW remains, for which technical solutions are needed for their integration.
On a monthly basis, the sum of PV and land wind power production over the year is more
balanced than the output of the two sectors alone (Figure 26).
18.3.6 Cogeneration of power and heat

Low-temperature heat for space heating and hot water, as well as industrial process heat
at a high temperature level are still largely obtained today through the combustion of
fossil resources and in conjunction with small heat storage capacities. In a renewable en-
ergy system, large amounts of useful heat are generated during the transformation of
electrical energy from the waste heat of converters. Large heat storage capacities for low
temperature heat (Section18.3.7.1) enable the current-driven operation of the converter.
The expansion of heat distribution networks is limited to a much greater extent by dis-
tance-dependent transport losses than in the electricity sector. For this reason, systems
with combined heat and power (Figure 45) must be tailored in their performance and
placement to local heat consumption and existing heating networks. These can be local
heating networks with a heat transfer between neighboring buildings or district heating
networks that supply districts or entire cities.
High-temperature heat for industrial processes can be obtained from the waste heat of
cogeneration gas turbines (up to approx. 550 ° C). In Germany, at the end of 2014, about
33 GW of electrical CHP power was connected to the grid [ÖKO2], which mainly uses
natural gas, biomass and coal. CHP plants achieve overall efficiencies of up to 90%, and
gas CHPs as much as 95% [UBA2]. Even micro-CHPs for a single-family home can achieve
electrical efficiencies of up to 25% and overall efficiencies of up to 90% [LICHT]. They use
combustion or Stirling engines to generate mechanical power. As the energy transfor-
mation progresses, CHP plants are being converted from fossil fuels to hydrogen and
methane, with some still burning biomethane or biomass.
18.3.7 Energy storage

Energy storage devices are components that can absorb energy and deliver usable en-
ergy. Energy converters such as water or heat pumps, electrolysers, or fuel cells are used
in charging and discharging. In some energy storage systems, the energy is extracted in a
converted form, such as in the case of heat storage systems that are charged with elec-
tricity. A hydrogen storage unit is used as an energy storage unit when hydrogen or its
derivatives serve as an energy source, otherwise it is used as a material storage unit, for
example for the chemical industry. The loading of material storage by energy-intensive
processes, e.g. aluminum production, can serve the grid via load management (Section
18.3.4).
18.3.7.1 Low-temperature heat storage

Electric heat pumps consume electricity to provide useful heat from ambient heat (heat-
ing) or to dissipate heat into the environment (cooling). In the building sector, the
efficiency of a heat pump is specified as the annual performance factor (APF) and is around
300% in heating mode, depending on the technology and load. An efficient operation is
achieved by heat pumps with surface heating systems, mostly underfloor heating systems,
which manage with low feed temperatures. Resistance heaters (heating rods) convert
electricity into heat with 100% efficiency, but with low exergetic efficiency when produc-
ing low temperature heat.
Thermal storage capacity can be provided much more cheaply than electricity-to-electricity
storage capacity. If the thermal storage capacity and the heat pump capacity are suffi-
ciently dimensioned, their loading can be supply-oriented, depending on the current re-
sidual load. For this purpose, thermal storage units and cold storage units, e.g. of air-
conditioning systems, refrigerated warehouses and food markets, are preferably charged
during the core time of the day or according to electricity price signals. However, in the
absence of generously dimensioned thermal heat storage facilities, the thermosensitivity
of the electricity load increases and larger power reserves have to be kept available at
power plants.
Low-temperature heat storage, especially hot water storage, enable the current-driven,
highly efficient operation of CHP systems on both sides of the residual load curve (Figure
47), as well as heat pumps and heating rods on the customer side. The same storage can
be loaded simultaneously, for example, at high power surplus via heat pump and heating
rod, in electricity demand by a CHP. Heat storage systems are scalable from single-family
house to multi-family houses and commercial enterprises to neighborhood supply. The
proportionate storage losses and the specific costs decrease with the size of the storage.
Large storage tanks (from several thousand m³) can be operated as seasonal heat storage
(http://www.saisonalspeicher.de). They enable the transfer of useful heat from the sum-
mer to the winter half-year with its much higher heat requirement.
Thermal storages increase the self-consumption of PV systems when they are loaded by
heat pumps or heating rods, especially in the summer months. Seasonally, the PV system
can heat up the domestic hot water, in particular when the PV modules with high incli-
nation are mounted on steep south-facing roofs or on southern facades. As soon as price
signals become available, decentralized thermal storage units can also be charged from
the power grid and, for example, use excess wind power.
18.3.7.2 High-temperature heat storage

Excess electricity can be very efficiently converted into high-temperature heat (order of
magnitude 650 °C) by means of resistance heaters. The high-temperature heat can be
stored as latent heat in liquid salt storage or as sensitive heat in rock fill [Siem] or steel
bodies [Vatt]. In the case of electricity demand, the heat is used for industrial processes or
for driving a conventional steam turbine, possibly with further use of the low-temperature
heat. The first pilot plants are currently being tested, and the manufacturer Lumenion
states a current-to-current efficiency of 25%.
18.3.7.3 Cooling Storage
At the location of cooling generation and consumption, e.g. in air-conditioning systems

for buildings or in refrigerated warehouses, cooling can be stored by comparatively simple
means. A further requirement for grid-serving operation is a sufficiently dimensioned ca-
pacity of the cooling generator.
At very low temperatures, power-to-power operation is also possible. Liquid air energy
storage (LAES) systems based on liquid air (-195°C) are currently being tested. Depending
on the use of additional components, power-to-power efficiencies of approx. 25-50% are
planned.
18.3.7.4 Stationary batteries

Lithium-ion batteries have followed a similar steep price learning curve as PV modules and
have reached a price level of approx. 110 €/kWh in 2020 (without energy management
system, https://de.statista.com/statistik/daten/studie/534429/umfrage/weltweite-preise-
fuer-lithium-ionen-akkus/). With 2000 charging cycles, this battery price corresponds
mathematically to a surcharge of 5.5 ct/kWh on the electricity price, plus charging losses.
With small, stationary batteries, households can extend their self-consumption of PV elec-
tricity into the evening hours and thus massively increase it (typically doubling it, see Figure
55). At the end of 2020, there were approximately 270,000 PV electricity storage units
installed in Germany [BSW1]. The total installed battery capacity in Germany is thus likely
to be in the order of 1.5 GWh. With grid-serving system management of the batteries,
grid relief would be possible by reducing the midday feed-in peak (Figure 56). Storage
would thus enable an increased PV addition [ISE7]. Pilot projects are also currently inves-
tigating the storage of electrical energy in large, stationary batteries [RWE].
Share of on-site consumption Usable battery capacity in kWh
PV-Power in kWh
Figure 55: Percent of on-site consumption in dependence of the battery capacity and PV array
power for a single-family home with an annual electricity consumption of 4,700 kWh. [Quasch]
Figure 56: Comparison of the conventional and grid-optimized system operation [ISE7]
18.3.7.5 Fahrzeugbatterien
Electric vehicles use batteries as electro-chemical energy storage devices, in hybrid vehicles
supported by an internal combustion engine or a fuel cell. At the end of 2020, 330,000
all-electric cars (BEVs, excluding plug-in hybrids) were registered in Germany, out of a
total of approximately 48 million passenger cars (de.statista.com, www.kba.de). Mathe-
matically, the total mileage of passenger cars in Germany of 645 billion km in 2019 [KBA]
at a consumption of 160 W/km [AGORA2] corresponds to an annual electricity consump-
tion by e-cars of 100 TWh. Additional consumption arises from electric utility vehicles, as
well as approx. 15% charging losses and conversion losses to bridge periods of high re-
sidual load using hydrogen. Several measures are necessary to activate vehicle batteries
as grid-serving energy storage devices.
Supply-dependent electricity prices will motivate residential and business customers
to choose low-cost charging times with a high share of RE in the electricity mix. Variable
fuel prices are not new; gas stations also vary their prices depending on the time of day.
In 2020, the share of electricity from renewables in net electricity generation in Germany
varied between 15% and 85%. Those who already want to supply their e-car with par-
ticularly green electricity from the grid prefer to charge at night in winter, and around
midday in summer and on sunny spring and fall days. At any time of year, the weekend
is usually advantageous. The significantly lower power consumption on weekends and
winter nights tends to improve the carbon footprint. In spring, summer and autumn, a lot
of solar power is often produced at midday. Precise information on the current and
planned share of RE in the German electricity mix is shown in the Energy Charts [ISE4]. In
order to be able to supply PV electricity for direct consumption, charging stations must be
located at typical daytime sites, e.g. at the workplace, in parking garages, or at public
parking lots.
Remote control of the charging power, taking into account the mobility needs in indi-
vidual cases, allows grid operators to stabilize the grid.
Bidirectional energy management systems enable electric vehicles to operate as elec-

tricity storage systems when they are connected to the grid and do not have to maintain
full driving range on standby at all times. With ten million e-vehicles on the grid, each
with 20 kWh of dispatchable storage capacity, this adds up to 200 GWh of battery ca-
pacity. Private vehicles park for an average of 23 hours per day, and the limited capacity
of traffic routes alone forces most cars to be parked for most of this time. E-vehicles
connected to the grid can also provide an economic benefit when stationary via their
batteries, unlike their combustion engine predecessors. With a charging capacity of about
40 kW per vehicle in fast charging mode, 25000 vehicles on the grid can already provide
a gigawatt of bidirectionally controllable power for primary, secondary and minute re-
serve.
18.3.7.6 Mechanical storage

The currently installed pumped storage capacity in the German grid stands at almost
38 GWh, while rated power is approximately 10 GW and the average efficiency value is
70 percent (without transmission losses). As a comparison, the mentioned storage capac-
ity corresponds to the yield of the German PV power plant park from less than one oper-
ating hour under full load. Run-of-river power plants can hardly make regular contribu-
tions in complementary operation due to the lack of stowage capacity. Their contribution
of approx. 3,8 GW nominal output [ISE4] is not very expandable. The mechanical storage
of electrical energy in compressed air accumulators (adiabatic compressed air energy stor-
age, CAES) is currently being tested.
18.3.7.7 Hydrogen and synthesis products
The electrolytic conversion of excess solar and wind energy into hydrogen, with subse-
quent methanation and further processing into synthetic liquid fuels (e.g. methanol) or to
produce ammonia, is currently being scaled up and tested [AMP].
Commercial alkaline electrolyzers achieve efficiencies of up to 80%, high-temperature

electrolyzers even more than 80%. Additional energy is required for gas compression,
possibly liquefaction (20-30% loss) and subsequent synthesis steps. In April 2019, elec-
trolyzers with a total capacity of about 30 MW were connected to the German grid,
273 MW were planned [DVGW]. Figure 57 shows current and forecast investment costs
for various electrolysis technologies.
Figure 57: Specific investment costs for different electrolyzer technologies (PEMEL: Membrane
electrolysis, AEL: Alkaline electrolysis, HTEL: High-temperature electrolysis, [NOW])
The conversion of renewable energy to storable energy sources gas ("Power-to-X") opens
up huge, already existing storage possibilities. It is already technically possible today to
increase the hydrogen content in the gas network to up to 20%. In total, around 230
TWh of working gas (equivalent to 820 petajoules) can be stored in existing underground
gas storage facilities. Underground cavern storage facilities account for about two thirds
of the volume of German gas storage facilities and can store up to 100 percent hydrogen.
These synthetic energy sources can be reconverted via fuel cells or thermal power plants,
but they can also be used as fuels in the transport sector (for example, hydrogen for fuel
cell vehicles, diesel substitutes for shipping, kerosene substitutes in aviation) or as starting
materials for the chemical industry. Reversible high-temperature electrolyzers, which can
also be operated as fuel cells, are currently being tested [salt].
Synthetic energy sources can be converted back into electricity via stationary fuel cells
(efficiency up to approx. 65%) or thermal power plants. They can also be used as fuels in
the transport sector (e.g. hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles, diesel substitutes for shipping,
kerosene substitutes in air traffic) or as raw materials for the chemical industry. Reversible
high-temperature fuel cells (rSOC, “reversible Solid Oxide Cell”), which can also be oper-
ated as electrolyzers are under development and currently achieve a current-to-current
efficiency of 43% [FZJ]. Compared to a combination of pure electrolyzers with pure fuel
cells, these bidirectional converters as stationary power plants in the power grid promise
a high number of full load hours and lower investment costs per installed total capacity.
18.3.7.8 Overview
Figure 58 shows paths for storing and converting PV and wind power. In addition to the
technical efficiency, the practical relevance of these paths includes to consider the costs
of the nominal power of converters to be installed (€/W) and the capacity of storage sys-
tems (€/Wh).
Figure 58: Technologies for energy storage and converters with today's achievable efficiencies at
the end of the converter chain, without combined heat and power
18.3.8 Grid expansion
18.3.8.1 National grid expansion

Studies conducted by Fraunhofer IWES and ECOFYS on behalf of the BSW had shown
that an expansion of installed PV capacity to 70 GWp by 2020 shall incur costs of this grid
expansion of approximately 1.1 billion euros [IWES1], [ECOFYS]. The corresponding an-
nual costs amount to approximately 10% of the routine annual expenditure for network
upgrading. Consideration was given to expansion in the low-voltage grid with PV systems
providing system services (e.g., voltage maintenance through reactive power compensa-
tion) and partial equipment of grid transformers with control equipment.
In order to avoid local network overloads due to generation or consumption peaks, battery
storage is increasingly being implemented as an economically interesting alternative to
expanding the network. Comparatively high grid expansion costs arise for the transmis-
sion of wind power from northern to southern Germany and for the connection of the
off-shore wind power plants.
18.3.8.2 Strengthening the European grid

The German power grid is part of the European network. An increase in the cross-border
dome capacity of currently around 20 GW enables a better compensation of volatile PV
electricity production via European electricity trading. Figure 59 shows the installed ca-
pacity of run-of-river and storage hydro power plants as well as of pumped storage power
plants. Storage power plants can be operated as a complement to PV generation, pumped
storage can act as efficient electricity-to-electricity storage.
Figure 59: Installed capacity of hydroelectric power plants in neighboring countries, figures from
[IHA]
18.3.9 Overview
From today's perspective, an energy system based on almost 100% renewable energy is
technically and economically feasible. Figure 60 shows the main elements connected to
the grid, from extraction to transformation and storage to consumption. In order to re-
duce the storage requirements, the power consumption in households and industry is
made more flexible sometimes. ICT stands for information and communication technol-
ogy. The dashed boxes indicate that currently very low power (of converters) or capacities
(in storages) are available.
Figure 60: Simplified scheme of a Renewable Energy System with the most important grid-related
components of the categories production, conversion, storage and consumption.
In the "heat" sector (red), cogeneration units, heat pumps and - in the case of supply
peaks on the electricity side - heating elements load the heat storage units. Wherever the
collection density permits, for example in neighborhoods, efficient storage takes place
centrally in large heat storage facilities.
In the "gas" sector (green), biomass fermenters produce methane and electrolyzers hy-
drogen, which can also be methanized or processed into synthetic fuels. Partly biomass is
burned directly in the CHP. When electricity is needed, combined gas and steam turbines,
fuel cells and, if demand peaks occur, even pure gas turbines are used. Hydrogen electric
vehicles refuel their fuel from stationary gas storage, vehicles for long distances (especially
aircraft) refuel liquid synthetic fuels.
In the "battery" sector (black), stationary, central or decentralized electrochemical stores
are charged or discharged depending on the residual load. Mobile batteries in electric
vehicles primarily serve the mobility needs, but can also support the network bidirection-
ally at standstill. In most electrochemical storage systems, the converter and the storage
tank are structurally fused; only so-called redox flow batteries have external, scalable stor-
age tanks.
In the mechanical sector (blue), water storage power plants are operated bidirectionally
via pumps and turbines, similar to compressed air storage power plants via compressors
and turbines.
Time horizon until 2025: focus on "flexibilisation"

1. The energy efficiency of electricity consumers is increasing in all sectors.
2. The installed PV power is increased to 80 - 90 GW, close to consumption, for steady-
ing of production in East / West orientation or with tracking, with grid-supporting
inverter functions.
3. Load management: Parts of household, industrial and e-mobility power consumption
are adjusted to the availability of PV power (and wind power) through demand-side
management (supply-based tariffs or signals).
4. Thermal storage, local and district heating networks are being expanded.
5. PV systems and electric vehicles are provided with relevant network storage batteries.
6. Pumped storage performance and capacity are being expanded.
7. For the power utilization of occasional EE current peaks low-cost (€/W) heating rods
are built into thermal storage.
8. For the power utilization of frequent excess electricity surges, electric heat pumps
with feed-in into thermal storage are constructed.
9. Low-cost (€/W) gas turbines are built to cover occasional residual load peaks
10. To cover frequent residual load gaps, efficient CCGT/CHP power plants with feed-in
into thermal storage are set up
11. Existing coal-fired power plants will, if possible, be optimized for flexible operation,
otherwise shut down.
12. The power grid connections to our neighboring countries will be strengthened.
Time frame until 2050: focus on "storage"

1. The installed PV capacity will be gradually expanded to approx. 400 GW, for a solar
power production of approx. 350-400 TWh/a
2. The heat supply will be completely converted to RE, the structural thermal protection
will be optimized
3. The traffic will be completely converted to electricity or synthetic fuels from renewable
sources
4. The conversion and storage of RE (in particular electricity-to-electricity) via RE gas and
batteries will be massively expanded
5. Consumption of fossil fuels will be completely stopped
In order to avoid costly undesirable developments and to keep pace with the above steps,
incentives are needed: a stable EEG, investment incentives for energy efficiency measures,
multifunctional power plants and pumped storage, price and investment incentives for
supply-side electricity consumption and incentives for demand-based electricity supply. A
further measure could be the reduction of the implicit subsidy for coal-fired power plants
through a shortage of CO2 allowances or, nationally, by a CO2 tax.
18.4 Does the energy transformation have to wait for federal policy?
No, even though federal politics can make things easier for everyone.
In Germany the Bundestag, as legislator in Germany, sets the framework for the energy
transformation. In addition, there are a number of important players who can make a
difference in their fields of action, regardless of the regulatory framework. Support of
these actors sends thus clear signals in the policy.
Consumers can demand renewables and energy efficiency from sources of electricity and
heat, their choice of means of transport and their overall consumption. Investors are re-
quired to invest in the energy transition, be it on their own roof, in investment companies
or funds. Decision-makers in commercial and industrial companies or municipal utilities
can examine which measures are sustainable and at the same time advance the energy
transformation. Finally, federal states, cities and municipalities can promote the energy
transformation through a plethora of measures, from advising the stakeholders to pro-
moting pilot projects, providing space and making investment decisions.
19 Do we need PV production in Germany?

Yes, if we want to avoid new dependencies in energy supply.
As the energy transformation progresses, Germany will leave behind the «fossil fuel” cen-
tury, in which we spent 90 billion euros for oil and gas imports annually and thus financed
authoritarian governments.
The energy transformation offers the chance to escape from this dependency. Not only
does the sun also shine in Germany but Germany has also made decisive contributions to
technology development in the solar sector. Despite the slowdown in national expansion
of Germany’s solar market, the German PV sector with its material manufacturers, engi-
neers, component manufacturers, R&D institutes and training facilities has held onto its
leading position worldwide.
An energy system converted to renewables is based, among others, on 400 GW of in-

stalled PV power. Annual installations of 12-13 GW are required for the construction and
increasingly for the ongoing renewal of these power stations, corresponding to approx.
40 million PV modules at a cost of several billion euros. A PV production in Germany offers
long-term security of supply at high ecological and quality standards.
20 Does it still need a Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG)?
Yes, with focusing on the energy transformation process.
The current market mechanisms would provide too little incentive for long-term invest-
ment in the energy transformation without the support of an EEG. The main reasons is
the sectoral gaping pricing of CO2 emissions, which fluctuates with the stock market and
is much too low overall. A socially balanced national carbon tax, such as that introduced
in Sweden in 1991 and in Switzerland in 2008 as a "tax levy", can bridge these short-
comings.
As a rule, PV power plants of all sizes require a grid connection in order to deliver elec-
tricity that can neither be consumed on site nor saved economically. In order to maintain
the diversity of actors involved in PV generators, a legal framework must entice the grid
operator to make connections easily.
Furthermore, PV power plants require a guaranteed long-term electricity purchase at a

minimum price. This also applies to self-consumers who can not consume or store their
entire electricity production. The investment costs of PV power plants dominate the elec-
tricity generation costs, and curtailment saves no operating costs. It would also be far too
expensive to move an existing PV power plant to another location in order to supply new
customers there. In addition, a PV power plant that is being built today is competing with
PV power plants of later years, which will deliver solar power at the same time as the
electricity production cost is expected to continue to decline (deflationary effect for LCOE,
declining market value factor).
Innovative technologies, such as integrated PV, have slightly higher electricity generation
costs in direct comparison with simple PV open-space systems, but they do not take up
any additional space. In order to accelerate their market entry and thus defuse conflicts
of use at an early stage, they need start-up funding.
21 Do PV modules contain toxic substances?

Often yes, so PV modules do not belong in the residual waste.
21.1 Wafer-based modules

The silicon wafer-based modules (more than 90 percent of the market share) often con-
tain lead in the cell metallization layer (around 2 grams of lead per 60-cell module) and in
the solder used (approximately 10 grams of lead). Lead, a toxic heavy metal, is soluble in
certain, strongly acidic or basic environments, and lamination in the module does not
permanently prevent mass transfer [IPV]. In wafer-based modules, lead can be completely
substituted by harmless materials at low additional costs. Some module manufacturers
use backsheets containing fluoropolymers, for example polyvinyl fluoride
21.2 Thin-film modules
Cadmium telluride (CdTe) thin-film modules (approximately five percent of market share)
contain cadmium (Cd) in salt form. The technology behind this type of module does not
allow this material to be substituted. Metallic cadmium and cadmium oxide are classified
as toxic; CdTe as harmful to health. Alternative thin-film modules containing little or no
Cd are based on amorphous silicon or copper indium selenide (CIS). CIS solar cells contain
selenium which can be toxic when oxidized (e.g. after a fire) independent of the amount.
Many manufacturers declare the conformity of their CIS modules with the RoHS chemical
regulation (Restriction of certain hazardous substances) and the EU chemicals ordinance
REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of chemicals). For a differ-
entiated evaluation, reference is made to independent investigations of each module type.
21.3 Solar glass

All conventional solar modules require a front cover made of glass. The glass shall have a
very low absorption in the spectral range between 380 and 1100 nm, conform to solar
glass quality. Some glass manufacturers refine the molten glass and increase the light
transmission by adding antimony (Sb). If this glass is disposed of in waste dumps, anti-
mony can seep into the ground water. Studies indicate that antimony compounds have a
similar effect as arsenic compounds. Alternative refining processes without antimony ad-
dition are available.
21.4 Take-back schemes and recycling

In June 2010, PV producers launched a cross-manufacturer recycling system (PV Cycle),
with currently more than 300 members. The version of the European WEEE Directive
(Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive) that came into force on August 13,
2012 had to be implemented in all EU countries by the end of February 2014. It obliges
producers to take back PV modules free of charge and to return them to the material
cycle. In October 2015, the act on the distribution, return and environmentally sound
disposal of electrical and electronic equipment (Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act -
ElektroG) came into force in Germany. It classifies PV modules as large appliances and
regulates take-back obligations and financing. The proportion of recovery (collection rate)
must be at least 85 percent and the proportion of preparation for reuse and recycling at
least 80 percent (recycling rate).
In the recycling process, the aluminum frame, junction box and glass are separated from
the laminate. Aluminum and glass are recycled. Material separation processes for the re-
maining laminate are being tested. Its valuable components include silicon, silver on the
solar cells and the copper of the cell connectors.
In its White Paper, Deutsche Umwelthilfe shows clear potential for improvement in the
reuse and recycling of PV modules [DUH].
22 Are there enough raw materials available for PV production?
22.1 Wafer-based modules
Wafer-based modules do not require any raw materials which could become limited in
the foreseeable future. The main components by weight are glass, aluminum, polymers
and silicon, with silicon and aluminum among the most important components of the
earth's crust by weight. Most critical is silver consumption for cell production. The PV
industry currently consumes about 1,500 metric tonnes of silver annually, corresponding
to almost 6 % of production in 2020. The silver on the solar cell can be technically sub-
stituted by copper to the greatest possible extent, and some manufacturers already use
copper.
22.2 Thin-film modules

The availability of raw materials depends on the technology being used.
Contradictory statements have been made concerning the availability of tellurium and
indium for CdTe and CIS modules respectively. No raw material shortages have been fore-
seen for thin-film modules made from silicon.
23 Do PV plants increase the risk of fire?

23.1 Can defective PV plants cause a fire?
Yes, as is the case with all electric installations.
Certain faults in the components of PV plants that conduct electricity may cause electric
arcs to form. If flammable material, like roofing material or wood, lies in close vicinity to
these arcs, then a fire may break out depending on how easily the material ignites. In
comparison to AC installations, the DC power of solar cells may even serve as a stabilizing
factor for any fault currents that occur. The current can only be stopped by disconnecting
the circuit or preventing irradiation reaching any of the modules, meaning that PV plants
must be constructed carefully.
With more than 2 million PV plants in Germany, the combination of all of these factors
has been proven to have caused a fire to break out in just a few cases. The majority of
the fires started as a result of faults in the cabling and connections.
«Using qualified skilled workers to ensure that existing regulations are adhered to is the
best form of fire protection. To date, 0.006 percent of all PV plants have caused a fire
resulting in serious damage. Over the past 20 years, 350 solar systems caught fire, with
the PV system being at fault in 120 of these cases. In 75 cases, the damage was severe
and in 10 cases, the entire building was burned to the ground.
The most important characteristic of PV systems is that they produce direct current. Since
they continue to generate electricity for as long as light falls on their modules, they cannot
simply be turned off at will. For example, if a low-quality or poorly installed module con-
nector becomes loose, the current flow is not always interrupted immediately, potentially
resulting in an electric arc, which, in the worst case scenario, may cause a fire to break
out. Accordingly, investigations are being carried out on how to prohibit the occurrence
of electric arcs. In addition, detectors are being developed that sound an alarm as soon
as only a small electric arc occurs.
PV plants do not present a greater fire risk than other technical facilities. Sufficient regu-
lations are in place that ensure the electrical safety of PV systems and it is imperative that
these are followed. Fires often start when systems are fitted by inexperienced piecework-
ers. Weak points are inevitable when solar module connectors are installed using combi-
nation pliers instead of tools designed especially for this purpose or when incompatible
connectors are used, and system operators should not cut costs in the wrong places.
In addition to technical improvements, control regulations are vital. At present, system

installers themselves are permitted to confirm that their installations were carried out in
compliance with regulations but experts now recommend that acceptance tests be per-
formed by third parties. It has also been suggested that privately owned PV systems are
subjected to a compulsory, regular safety test similar to that performed on commercial
plants every four years.” [ISE6]
23.2 Do PV plants pose a danger to firefighters?

Yes, as is also the case with many systems fitted with live cables.
Standing at least a few meters away from the fire when extinguishing a fire from outside
of the building protects firefighters from electric shocks. This safe distance is normally
given for all roof-mounted installations. The greatest risk for firefighters arises when ex-
tinguishing a fire from inside the building in areas where live, scorched cables connected
to the PV plant come into contact with water or the firefighters themselves. To minimize
this risk, the industry is developing emergency switches that use safety relays to separate
the modules from their DC connection in close vicinity to the roof.
In Germany, no firefighter has to date been injured by PV power while putting out a fire.
An incident widely reported in the press confused solar thermal collectors with PV mod-
ules and no PV plant was fitted to the house in question whatsoever.
«Comprehensive training courses for the fire brigade could eliminate any uncertainties
firefighters may have. As with every electrical installation, depending on the type of elec-
tric arc it is also possible to extinguish a fire using water from a distance of one to five
meters. Based on investigations to date, all of the claims stating that the fire brigade could
not extinguish a house fire due to the PV system have been found to be false.” [ISE6]
23.3 Do PV modules prevent firefighters from extinguishing fires externally from

the roof?
Yes.
The second «roof covering” created by the PV modules hinders the ability to extinguish
the fire, as the water simply drains away. According to the fire brigade, objects damaged
by a fire that needs to be extinguished in this way can rarely be saved, i.e. the damage
has to a large extent already been done and is irreversible before the PV plant impedes
the firefighters’ ability to put out the fire.
23.4 Are toxic emissions released when PV modules burn?

The Bavarian Environment Agency (Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt) has calculated
that the dispersion of fumes following a fire involving CdTe modules does not pose a
serious risk for the surrounding area and general public [LFU1].For CIS modules, inde-
pendent investigations for the different module types are referenced.
For wafer-based modules, the rear side foils can contain fluoropolymers, which themselves
are not poisonous. In a fire at high temperatures, however, they can decompose. Upon
examination, the Bavarian Environment Agency came to the conclusion that during a fire,
conflagration gases other than fluoropolymers play a more critical role in defining the
potential danger [LFU2].
24 Appendix: Terminology
24.1 EEG surcharge
«The EEG surcharge (EEG-Umlage in German) is the portion of the electricity price that
must be paid by the end user to support renewable energy. It results from the equalization
scheme for renewable energy sources, which is described in the Renewable Energy Act
(EEG). The EEG provides incentives for plants that generate power from renewable energy
and which otherwise could not be commissioned as a result of the market situation. Hy-
droelectric power plants, landfill gas, sewage gas, mine gas, biomass, geothermal energy,
wind power and solar power are supported.
Several stages are used to determine how the costs associated with promoting renewable
electricity are allocated to the end users. In the first stage, plant operators, who generate
power from renewable energy, are guaranteed a fixed feed-in tariff for all power pro-
duced by their plant.” [Bundestag]
The level of this feed-in tariff is based on the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for PV
plants installed at that time and is guaranteed for 20 years.
«The grid operators, who connect these renewable plants to their grids and who also
reimburse the plant operators for the fed-in power, transmit the power to the responsible
transmission system operator (TSO), who reimburse them in turn (second stage). In the
third stage, the renewable energy is distributed proportionally between Germany’s four
transmission system operators (TSO), compensating regional differences in renewable en-
ergy generation.
The Equalization Scheme Ordinance (Ausgleichsmechanismusverordnung, AusglMechV)

dated July 17, 2009 resulted in changes being made to the fourth step of the remuner-
ation and reimbursement scheme for renewable energy. Until these amendments were
adopted, the renewable power generated was simply transmitted (via the TSOs) at the
price of the feed-in tariff to the energy supply companies, who sell the power. Now,
however, TSOs are required to put the power generated from renewables onto the EEX
(spot market). The energy supply companies, which ultimately transmit the power to the
end customers, can obtain power from the market regardless of how much renewable
energy is fed into the grid. This gives them greater planning security and also allows them
to save costs. As a result, the costs of the EEG promotions remain first and foremost with
the TSOs.
The costs related to the EEG promotion is calculated based on the difference between the
rate of return generated by the renewable power put on the market (EEX) and the feed-
in tariffs paid to plant operators. (...)” [Bundestag]
These costs are then distributed over the total energy consumption – the so-called EEG
surcharge, which is apportioned to the end consumers by the electricity supply companies.
«The Equalization Scheme Ordinance (AusglMechV) stipulates that the TSOs set the level
of the EEG surcharge on October 15 of each year for the following year. The calculation
of the surcharge is subject to review by the German Federal Network Agency. (...) The
EEG surcharge is limited to 0.05 €-cts/kWh for energy-intensive companies.” [Bundestag].
As a result, energy-intensive industrial enterprises which spend a high proportion of their
costs on power are largely exempt from the EEG surcharge.
24.2 Module efficiency

Unless stated otherwise, module efficiency is given in terms of nominal efficiency. Under
standard test conditions (STC), it is calculated in terms of the relationship between the
amount of electricity generated and the level of irradiation on the module’s total surface
area. STC conditions imply a module temperature of 25 °C, vertical irradiance of 1000
W/m2 and a standard solar irradiance spectrum. During actual operation, conditions are
normally so different from these standard conditions that efficiency varies.
24.3 Rated power of a PV power plant

The rated power of a power plant is the ideal DC output of the module array under STC,
i.e. the product of the generator surface area, standard irradiance (1000 W/m2) and nom-
inal efficiency of the modules.
24.4 Specific yield

The specific yield [kWh/kWp] of a PV plant is the relationship between the useful yield
(alternating current yield) over a certain period of time (often one year) and the installed
(STC) module capacity. The useful yield is influenced by actual operating conditions, such
as module temperature, solar radiation intensity, angle of solar incidence, spectral devia-
tion from the standard spectrum, shading, snow cover, transmission losses, conversion
losses in the inverter (and where applicable in the transformer) and operational failures.
Manufacturer data on module output under STC may vary from the actual values. There-
fore, it is imperative that information on tolerances are checked.
The specific yield is generally higher in sunny locations but it is not dependent on nominal
module efficiency.
24.5 System efficiency

The system efficiency of a PV plant is the relationship between the useful yield (alternating
current yield) and the total amount of irradiance on the surface area of the PV modules.
The nominal module efficiency affects system efficiency.
24.6 Performance ratio

The performance ratio (PR) is often used to compare the efficiency of grid-connected PV
plants at different locations with various module types.
Performance ratio is defined as the relationship between a plant’s useful yield (alternating
current yield) and ideal yield (the product of the total amount of irradiance on the gener-
ator surface area and nominal module efficiency). New, carefully planned plants achieve
annual PR values of between 80 and 90 percent.
24.7 Base load, intermediate load, peak load, grid load and residual load
«Power demands fluctuate throughout the course of the day, generally peaking during
the day and falling to a minimum at night between midnight and 6:00am. Power demand
development is depicted as a load curve or load profile. In traditional energy technology,
the load curve is divided into three sections as follows:
1. base load
2. intermediate load
3. peak load
Base load describes the load line that remains almost constant over a 24-hour period. It is
covered by base-load power plants, such as nuclear power plants, lignite coal-fired power
plants and, for the time being, run-of-the-river power plants.
Intermediate load describes self-contained peaks in power demand which are easy to
forecast and refers to the majority of power needed during the course of a day in addition
to base load. Intermediate load is covered by intermediate-load plants, such as hard coal-
fired power plants and combined cycle power plants powered by methane with oil-fired
power plants being used now and again. Peak load refers to the remaining power de-
mands, generally coming into play when demand is at its very highest. Peak load is han-
dled by peak-load power plants, such as gas turbines and pumped-storage power plants.
These can be switched to nominal output within an extremely short space of time, com-
pensating for fluctuations and covering peaks in load.”
(…) «Grid load refers to the amount of electricity taken from the grid, while residual load
is the grid load less the amount of renewable energy fed in.” [ISET1]
24.8 Electricity generation and consumption

The gross power consumption is calculated as the sum of the national electricity produc-
tion and the balance of power exchanged between bordering countries. It includes the
self-consumption from power plants, storage losses, grid losses and unknowns. In 2017,
the sum of all losses amounted to 13% of the gross power consumption [AGEB6].
Net power consumption is the amount of electrical energy (final energy) used by the end
consumer. PV plants predominantly generate energy decentrally when electricity demand
is at a peak and the PV plant’s self-consumption does not reduce the PV yield by a note-
worthy amount. Instead of following the usual method of comparing output with gross
power consumption, it is plausible for PV to compare power output with net power con-
sumption.
Figure 61 shows the energy path from the primary energy source, e.g. solar irradiation
(irradiance [W/m2]), wind or natural gas (energy density during combustion [J/kg]), down
to the net energy that is important to the consumer. Large gas turbines show conversion
losses of 60-65%. PV power plants have conversion losses of 80-85%, with practically
free and unlimited primary energy. The gross electricity generation, adjusted for the im-
port balance, corresponds to the gross electricity consumption. Storage losses occur dur-
ing the operation of pumped storage power plants or batteries. Losses from pumped
storage power plants amount to approx. 25% of the stored amount of electricity, with Li-
ion batteries it is 5-10%, plus the losses in the battery management system. If hydrogen
is used as a power store via stationary electrolysers and fuel cells, the losses are around
50%. Storage losses will increasingly play a role for PV electricity as the installed PV ca-
pacity is expanded.
The in-house consumption of fossil and nuclear power plants is approx. 7% of their gross
generation, for PV power plants it is marginal. Grid losses, in particular line and trans-
former losses, amount to almost 6% in the German power grid. The decentralized nature
of the PV installations reduces the grid losses for PV electricity. The amount of electricity
consumed by the consumer is the net consumption (final energy). The efficiency of the
consumers devices determines the conversion losses up to the final useable energy, e.g.
power or light.
Figure 61: Terms of electricity generation and consumption
25 Appendix: Conversion tables [EEBW]
26 Appendix: Abbreviations
BEV Battery Electric Vehicle

BMU German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear
Safety
BSW German Solar Industry Association
CCGT Gas and steam generators
CHP Combined heat and power plant – a plant that uses combustion engines or gas
plant turbines to generate electrical energy and heat
EEG Act on Granting Priority to Renewable Energy Sources (Renewable Energy
Sources Act, EEG)
ESC Energy supply company
GHG Greenhouse Gas
ICT Information and communications technology
IEA International Energy Agency
PHEV Plug-in hybrid electric vehicle
PV Photovoltaics
RE Renewable energy
Wp Watt "peak", unit for nominal output of a PV module, a module array or a power
plant
27 Appendix: Sources
AEE1 Metaanalyse: Digitalisierung der Energiewende, Agency for Renewable Ener-

gies (Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien), August 2018
AEE2 Bundesländer-Übersicht zu Erneuerbaren Energien, https://www.foederal-er-
neuerbar.de/uebersicht/bundeslaender, Agency for Renewable Energies
(Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien), October 2018
AEE3 https://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/mediathek/grafiken/eigentuemerstruk-
tur-erneuerbare-energien, Agency for Renewable Energies (Agentur für Er-
neuerbare Energien), January 2021
AEE4 https://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/themen/akzeptanz-erneuerbarer/ak-
zeptanz-umfrage/klares-bekenntnis-der-deutschen-bevoelkerung-zu-erneuer-
baren-energien, Agency for Renewable Energies (Agentur für Erneuerbare
Energien), October 2018
AGEB Energy flow diagram 2019 for the Federal Republic of Germany in petajoules,
German Working Group on Energy Balances, September 2020
AGEB1 Energieverbrauch in Deutschland im Jahr 2017, AGEB, February 2018
AGEE Monatsbericht zur Entwicklung der erneuerbaren Stromerzeugung und Leis-
tung in Deutschland, Arbeitsgruppe Erneuerbare Energien-Statistik (AGEE-
Stat), February 2019
AGORA1 Stromnetze für 65 Prozent Erneuerbare bis 2030. Zwölf Maßnahmen für den
synchronen Ausbau von Netzen und Erneuerbaren Energien, Agora Energie-
wende, July 2018
AGORA2 Klimabilanz von Elektroautos - Einflussfaktoren und Verbesserungspotenzial,
Study commissioned by Agora Verkehrwende, ifeu - Institute for Energy and
Environmental Research, April 2019
AMP Sektorenkopplung: Amprion und Open Grid Europe geben Power-to-Gas in
Deutschland einen Schub, Pressemeldung Amprion, June 2018
ATW1 Weis M, van Bevern K, Linnemann T; Forschungsförderung Kernenergie 1956
bis 2010: Anschubfinanzierung oder Subvention?, ATW 56, Edition 2011, Vo-
lume 8/9
ATW2 Ludwig H, Salnikova T, Waas U; Lastwechselfähigkeiten deutscher KKW, ATW
55, Jg (2010), Volume 8/9
BAFA Hintergrundinformationen zur Besonderen Ausgleichsregelung, Antragsver-
fahren 2013 auf Begrenzung der EEG-Umlage 2014, Ed.: Federal Ministry for
the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) and Federal
Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA), 15 October 2013
BCG Klimapfade für Deutschland, Studie, The Boston Consulting Group (BCG) und
Prognos, on behalf of the Federal Association of German Industry (BDI), January
2018
BDEW2 Presentation „Erneuerbare Energien EEG_2017“, BDEW Bundesverband der
Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V., July 2017
BDEW3 Stromerzeugung und -verbrauch in Deutschland, Mitteilung des BDEW
(https://www.bdew.de/presse/presseinformationen/aktuelle-berechnungen-
von-zsw-und-bdew-2020), December 2020
BDEW4 Redispatch in Deutschland – Auswertung der Transparenzdaten, BDEW Bun-
desverband der Energie- und wasserwirtschaft e.B., August 9, 2016
BDEW5 BDEW Bundesverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V. Press con-
ference 20.12.2017 https://www.bdew.de/me-
dia/documents/20171220_PI_Anlage_Zahlen-Fakten.pdf (in German)
BDEW6 BDEW-Strompreisanalyse Januar 2019 - Haushalte und Industrie, BDEW Bun-
desverband der Energie- und Wasserwirtschaft e.V., July 2020
Beck Beck M, Bopp G, Goetzberger A, Obergfell T, Reise C, Schindele S; Combining
PV and Food Crops to Agrophotovoltaic – Optimization of Orientation and Har-
vest, 27th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, Frankfurt, Ger-
many, September 24–28, 2012
BEE BEE-Szenario 2030 - 65% Erneuerbare Energien bis 2030; Ein Szenario des
Bundesverbands Erneuerbare Energie e.V. (BEE), May 2019
BMEL Daten und Fakten, Land-, Forst- und Ernährungswirtschaft mit Fischerei und
Wein- und Gartenbau, Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL), De-
cember 2017
BMVI Räumlich differenzierte Flächenpotentiale für erneuerbare Energien in Deutsch-
land. BMVI (Hrsg.), BMVI-Online-Publication 08/2015.
BMWi1 Gesamtausgabe der Energiedaten - Datensammlung des BMWi, Federal Mi-
nistry of Economics and Energy, last update: 22.06.2020
BMWi3 Forschungsförderung für die Energiewende, Bundesbericht Energieforschung
2016, Federal Ministry of Economics and Energy (BMWi)
BMWi4 Energiegewinnung und Energieverbrauch, Federal Ministry of Economics and
Energy (BMWi), Download as of 28.8.2016
https://www.bmwi.de/DE/Themen/Energie/Energiedaten-und-analysen/Ener-
giedaten/energiegewinnung-energieverbrauch.html
BMWi5 Vergütungen, Differenzkosten und EEG-Umlage 2000 bis 2021,
https://www.erneuerbare-energien.de/EE/Navigation/DE/Recht-Politik/
Das_EEG/DatenFakten/daten-und-fakten.html#doc95662bodyText2, Federal
Ministry of Economics and Energy (BMWi), as of December 2020
BMWi6 Bundesbericht Energieforschung 2020, S. 65, Federal Ministry of Economics
and Energy (BMWi), June 2020
BMWi7 Bundesbericht Energieforschung 2020, S. 29, Federal Ministry of Economics
and Energy (BMWi), June 2020
BNA Monitoringbericht 2020 von Bundesnetzagentur und Bundeskartellamt, Fed-
eral Network Agency for Electricity, Gas, Telecommunications, Post and Rail-
ways, as of January 2021
BNA1 Bundesnetzagentur legt Eigenkapitalrenditen für Strom- und Gasnetze fest,
Press release of the German Federal Network Agency, as of October 2016
BNE Solarparks – Gewinne für die Biodiversität, Studie des Bundesverbands Neue
Energiewirtschaft (bne) e.V., November 2019
BSW 50.000 neue Jobs durch Photovoltaik und Speicher, Press release from German
Solar Industry Association, Berlin, December 5, 2019
BSW1 Statistische Zahlen der deutschen Solarstrombranche (Photovoltaik), German
Solar Industry Association (BSW-Solar), Bundesverband Solarwirtschaft e. V.,
Berlin, February 2021
Bundes- EEG-Umlage 2010, German Parliament, Scientific Services, No. 21/10, March
tag 25, 2010
Carb https://www.carbonbrief.org/profound-shifts-underway-in-energy-system-
says-iea-world-energy-outlook, Carbon Brief, 2019
DESTA- Environmental economic calculations, private households and the environ-
TIS ment, DESTATIS, Federal Statistical Office, September 2020
DEWI Energiewirtschaftliche Planung für die Netzintegration von Windenergie in
Deutschland an Land und Offshore bis zum Jahr 2020, Study commissioned by
the German Energy Agency GmbH (dena), February 2005
DLR2 O’Sullivan M, Lehr U, Edler D; Bruttobeschäftigung durch erneuerbare Energien
in Deutschland und verringerte fossile Brennstoffimporte durch erneuerbare
Energien und Energieeffizienz, Zulieferung für den Monitoringbericht 2015, as
of September 2015
DUH Kreislaufwirtschaft in der Solarbranche stärken - Alte Photovoltaik-Module für
den Klima- und Ressourcenschutz nutzen, Deutsche Umwelthilfe e.V., March
2021
DVGW Deutscher Verein des Gas- und Wasserfaches e. V., Press release dated April
24, 2019
DWD Wolfgang Riecke, Bereitstellung von historischen Globalstrahlungsdaten für die
Photovoltaik, Second Symposium on Energy Meteorology, April 2011
ECOFYS Abschätzung der Kosten für die Integration großer Mengen an Photovoltaik in
die Niederspannungsnetze und Bewertung von Optimierungspotenzialen,
ECOFYS, March 2012
EEBW Erneuerbare Energien in Baden-Württemberg 2011, Ministry of the Environ-
ment, Climate Protection and the Energy Sector of Baden-Württemberg, No-
vember 2012
EEG Gesetz zur Einführung von Ausschreibungen für Strom aus erneuerbaren Ener-
2017 gien und zu weiteren Änderungen des Rechts der erneuerbaren Energien (EEG
2017), Bundesrat Printed matter 355/16, July 2016
EEG Gesetz zur Änderung des Erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetzes und weiterer ener-
2021 gierechtlicher Vorschriften (EEG 2021), Bundesrat Printed matter 763/20, De-
cember 2020
EEX Positionspapier der European Energy Exchange und EPEX SPTO, February 2014
EGGERS Eggers J-B, Behnisch M, Eisenlohr J, Poglitsch H, Phung W-F, Münzinger M,
Ferrara C, Kuhn T, PV-Ausbauerfordernisse versus Gebäudepotenzial: Ergebnis
einer gebäudescharfen Analyse für ganz Deutschland, 2020 (currently under
print)
EnAg Klimabilanz Photovoltaik - Wie groß ist der CO2-Fußabdruck von Solarstrom,
EnergieAgentur.NRW, 2017
EnBW EnBW verstärkt Engagement im Bereich Solarenergie, Press release, Energie Ba-
den-Württemberg AG, February 2019
ENER E-Mobility-Zukunft: ENERVIE an Meilenstein-Projekt beteiligt, Press release,
Südwestfalen Energie und Wasser AG, October 2018
ESYS Ausfelder et al., Sektorkopplung − Untersuchungen und Überlegungen zur
Entwicklung eines integrierten Energiesystems, Series of Energy Systems of the
Future, November 2017
EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency, Download as of 9.7.2013 von
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/causes.html#GreenhouseRole
FATH Karoline Fath, Technical and economic potential for photovoltaic systems on
buildings, KIT Scientific Publishing, Karlsruhe, July 2018
EuPD ENERGIEWENDE im Kontext von Atom und Kohleausstieg, Perspektiven im
Strommarkt bis 2040, Studie der EuPD Research Sustainable Management
GmbH, November 2019
FAU Deutschland ohne erneuerbare Energien?“ – Ein Update für die Jahre 2014 bis
2018, Discussion paper commissioned by EWS Elektrizitätswerke Schönau,
Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, October 2019
FFE Download of https://www.ffegmbh.de/aktuelles/veroeffentlichungen-und-
fachvortraege/828-merit-order-der-konventionellen-kraftwerke-in-deutsch-
land-2018, February 2020
FNR FNR according to Federal Statistical Office, (BMEL) 2019, Anbau und Verwen-
dung nachwachsender Rohstoffe in Deutschland, Fachagentur Nachwach-
sende Rohstoffe e.V. (FNR), March 2019
FNR1 Biokraftstoffe im Vergleich, Press graphics, Fachagentur Nachwachsende Roh-
stoffe e.V. (FNR), 2007
FNR2 Faustzahlen Biogastechnologie, Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V.
(FNR), https://biogas.fnr.de/daten-und-fakten/faustzahlen/, Download, March
2020
FÖS1 Gesellschaftliche Kosten der Atomenergie in Deutschland, Eine Zwischenbilanz
der staatlichen Förderungen und gesamtgesellschaftlichen Kosten von Atom-
energie seit 1955, Studie des Forums Ökologisch-Soziale Marktwirtschaft e.V.
(FÖS) im Auftrag von Greenpeace Energy eG, September 2020
FÖS2 Was Braunkohlestrom wirklich kostet, Studie des Forums Ökologisch-Soziale
Marktwirtschaft e.V. (FÖS) im Auftrag von Greenpeace Energy eG, June 2018
FÖS3 Brief analysis of government expenditure for EURATOM, study commissioned
by Greenpeace Energy eG, Forum Ökologische-Soziale Marktwirtschaft e.V.
(FÖS), October 2019
FVEE1 Energiekonzept 2050 - Eine Vision für ein nachhaltiges Energiekonzept auf Ba-
sis von Energieeffizienz und 100% erneuerbaren Energien«, German Research
Association for Renewable Energy (Forschungsverbund Erneuerbare Energien,
FVEE), June 2010, chart by B. Burger and updated on November 28, 2011
FZJ Reversible Brennstoffzelle bricht Wirkungsgrad-Rekord, Pressemeldung, For-
schungszentrum Jülich, December 2018
HTW Sinnvolle Dimensionierung von Photovoltaikanlagen für Prosumer, Short Study,
University of Applied Sciences (HTW) Berlin, March 2019
Hydro Caglayan D, Weber N, Heinrichs H, Linßen J, Robinius M, Kukla P, Stolten D,
Technical potential of salt caverns for hydrogen storage in Europe, Internatio-
nal Journal of Hydrogen Energy, Volume 45, Issue 11, 2020
IEA1 Renewables 2018 -Market analysis and forecast from 2018 to 2023, Interna-
tional Energy Agency (IEA), October 2018
IEA2 Redrawing the Energy-Climate Map, World Energy Outlook Special Report. In-
ternational Energy Agency (IEA), June 2013
IEA3 Energiepolitik der IEA-Länder, Prüfung 2013, Deutschland, Summary, Interna-
tional Energy Agency (IEA), April 2013
IEA5 World Energy Outlook, International Energy Agency (IEA), November 2019
IHA Hydropower status report, International Hydropower Association, May 2019
IPCC Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Climate
Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policymakers, Inter-
governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), WGI AR5, Sept. 2013
IPV Jessica Nover, Schadstofffreisetzung aus Photovoltaik-Modulen, Final Report,
University of Stuttgart, Institute of Photovoltaics, 2018
IRENA Future of Solar Photovoltaic: Deployment, investment, technology, grid inte-
gration and socio-economic aspects, Study of International Renewable Energy
Agency (IRENA), Abu Dhabi, 2019
ISE1 Kost C., Schlegl T.; Levelized Cost of Electricity Renewable Energies, study con-
ducted by the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE, December
2010
ISE2 Kiefer K, Farnung B, Müller B, Degradation in PV Power Plants: Theory and
Practice. 36th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition,
Marseille, 2019.
ISE4 https://www.energy-charts.de, Editor: Prof. Dr. Bruno Burger, Fraunhofer Insti-
tute for Solar Energy Systems ISE, Freiburg, Germany
ISE6 Fire Protection in Photovoltaic Systems – Facts replace Fiction, press release by
Fraunhofer ISE, February 2013; more information on fire protection can be
found at www.pvbrandsicherheit.de
ISE7 Speicherstudie 2013 - Kurzgutachten zur Abschätzung und Einordnung ener-
giewirtschaftlicher, ökonomischer und anderer Effekte bei Förderung von ob-
jektgebunden elektrochemischen Speichern, Study by Fraunhofer Institute for
Solar Energy Systems ISE, January 2013
ISE9 Kurzstudie zur EEG-Umlage, Fraunhofer Insitute for Solar Energy Systems ISE,
April 2015
ISE10 Photovoltaics Report, Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE, PSE
Conferences & Consulting GmbH, September 2020
ISE11 Meta Study on Future Crosssectoral Decarbonization Target Systems in Com-
parison to Current Status of Technologies, Discussion Paper, Fraunhofer ISE,
March 2018
ISE12 Wege zu einem klimaneutralen Energiesystem - Die deutsche Energiewende im
Kontext gesellschaftlicher Verhaltensweisen, Study of Fraunhofer ISE,
February 2020
ISET Rolle der Solarstromerzeugung in zukünftigen Energieversorgungsstrukturen -
Welche Wertigkeit hat Solarstrom?, Investigation commissioned by the Ger-
man Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear
Safety, May 2008
ISET1 Saint-Drenan Y-M et al. «Summenganglinien für Energie 2.0”, study con-
ducted by the Institute for Solar Energy Technology (Institut für Solare Ener-
gieversorgungstechnik ISET e.V., April 2009
IVL Lithium-Ion Vehicle Battery Production, Status 2019 on Energy Use, CO2 Emis-
sions, Use of Metals, Products Environmental Footprint, and Recycling, Study
by the Swedish Environmental Research Institute on behalf of the Swedish En-
ergy Agency, November 2019
IWES1 Vorstudie zur Integration großer Anteile Photovoltaik in die elektrische Ener-
gieversorgung, study commissioned by the German Solar Industry Association
(BSW) and the Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Tech-
nology IWES, November 2011
IWF How Large Are Global Energy Subsidies? IMF Working Paper by David Coady,
Ian Parry, Louis Sears and Baoping Shang, 2015
IZES Kurzfristige Effekte der PV-Einspeisung auf den Großhandelsstrompreis, Insti-
tut für ZukunftsEnergieSysteme (IZES), January 31, 2012
KBA Zahlen im Überblick – Statistik, German Federal Motor Vehicle Office, June
2018
LFU1 Berechnung von Immissionen beim Brand einer Photovoltaik-Anlage aus Cad-
miumtellurid-Modulen, Bavarian Environment Agency (Bayerisches Landesamt
für Umwelt), 11-2011
LFU2 Beurteilung von Kunststoffbränden, Az: 1/7-1515-21294, Bavarian Environ-
ment Agency (Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt), 1995
Licht Analyse des Beitrags von Mini-BHKW zur Senkung von CO2-Emissionen und
zum Ausgleich von Windenergie, Gutachten zum geplanten »ZuhauseKraft-
werk«, commissioned by LichtBlick AG, LBD-Beratungsgesellschaft mbH, 2009
Licht2 Repräsentative Umfrage zu erneuerbaren Energien, Marktforschungsinstitut Y-
ouGov, commissioned by LichtBlick AG, February 2020
MWV Annual Report 2018, Association of the German Petroleum Industry (Miner-
alölwirtschaftsverband e.V.), July 2018
NEHS Nationales Emissionshandelssystem – Hintergrundpapier, Deutsche Emissions-
handelsstelle (DEHSt) im Umweltbundesamt, November 2020
NOW IndWEDe - Industrialisierung der Wasserelektrolyse in Deutschland, Study com-
missioned by the German Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastruc-
ture (BMVI), 2018
ÖKO EEG-Umlage und die Kosten der Stromversorgung für 2014 – Eine Analyse von
Trends, Ursachen und Wechselwirkungen, Short study commissioned by
Greenpeace, June 2013
ÖKO1 Beschäftigungsentwicklung in der Braunkohleindustrie: Status quo und Pro-
jektion, Öko-Institut Berlin, July 2018
ÖKO2 Aktueller Stand der KWK-Erzeugung (Dezember 2015), Study by the Ökoin-
stitut e.V. on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and
Energy, December 2015
ÖKO3 Eingesparte Kosten für Energieimporte im Jahr 2015 und die Innovationsef-
fekte durch die Nutzung erneuerbarer Energien in Deutschland, Memo of
Ökoinstitut e.V., October 2016
Prog Klimaneutrales Deutschland, Prognos, Öko-Institut, Wuppertal-Institut, Sum-
mary, commissioned by Agora Energiewende, Agora Verkehrswende and Cli-
mate Neutrality Foundation, October 2020
Quasch Quaschning V, Solare Unabhängigkeitserklärung, Photovoltaik, October 2012
SCBW Photovoltaik: Neue Solarstromanlagen lohnen sich auch 2021, Press Informa-
tion Solar Cluster Baden-Württemberg, January 2021
SCBW1 Weiterbetrieb von Ü20-Photovoltaikanlagen - Möglichkeiten nach Ende ner
EEG-Förderdauer, Faktenpapier, Solar Cluster Baden-Württemberg, January
2021
Sprin Motorentechnik - Im Fokus, online article, December 2010
https://www.springerprofessional.de/motorentechnik/pkw-antriebe-im-ueber-
blick-vergangenheit-gegenwart-und-zukunft/6561052
Shell Shell Scenarios Sky - Meeting the goals of the Paris agreement, Shell Interna-
tional B.V., March 2018
Siem Weit mehr als nur heiße Luft, Pressemeldung, Siemens AG, March 2017
SWM M-Partnerkraft - Das virtuelle Kraftwerk der SWM, Flyer of Stadtwerke Mün-
chen, January 2013
Test »Immer sparsamer«, Test 1/2012, Stiftung Warentest
UBA Energieziel 2050: 100% Strom aus erneuerbaren Quellen, German Federal
Environment Agency, July 2010
UBA1 Erneuerbare Energien in Deutschland, Daten zur Entwicklung im Jahr 2019,
German Federal Environment Agency, March 2020
UBA2 Article at https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/energie/kraft-waerme-
kopplung-kwk#textpart-1, German Federal Environment Agency, October
2018
UBA3 Methodenkonvention 3.0 zur Ermittlung von Umweltkosten - Methodische
Grundlagen, German Federal Environment Agency, November 2018
UBA4 Daten und Fakten zu Braun- und Steinkohlen, German Federal Environment
Agency, December 2017
UBA5 Der Europäische Emissionshandel, https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/
klima/der-europaeische-emissionshandel#textpart-1, Download on June 2019
UBA6 Entwicklung der spezifischen Kohlendioxid-Emissionen des deutschen Strom-
mix in den Jahren 1990 – 2018, German Federal Environment Agency, April
2019
UBA7 Emissionsbilanz erneuerbarer Energieträger - Bestimmung der vermiedenen
Emissionen im Jahr 2018, German Federal Environment Agency, November
2019
UBA8 Wege in eine ressourcenschonende Treibhausgasneutralität – RESCUE
Kurzfassung, German Federal Environment Agency, November 2019
ÜNB Mittelfristprognose zur deutschlandweiten Stromerzeugung aus EEG-geför-
derten Kraftwerken für die Kalenderjahre 2021 bis 2025, prepared on behalf
of 50Hertz Transmission GmbH, Amprion GmbH, TenneT TSO GmbH, Trans-
netBW GmbH, enervis energy advisors GmbH, October 2020
Vatt CO2-freie Energie fürs Quartier: Sektorenkoppelnder Stahlspeicher bringt
Energiewende auf Hochtemperatur, Pressemeldung, Vattenfall, October 2018
VFL Berechnung einer risikoadäquaten Versicherungsprämie zur Deckung der
Haftpflichtrisiken, die aus dem Betrieb von Kernkraftwerken resultieren, study
conducted by the Versicherungsforen Leipzig and commissioned by the Ger-
man Renewable Energy Federation (Bundesverband Erneuerbare Energie e.V.,
BEE), April 1, 2011
VGB Kraftwerke 2020+, opinion of the Scientific Council of VGB PowerTech e.V.,
2010
VIK VIK Strompreisindex Mittelspannung, Verband der Industriellen Energie- und
Kraftwirtschaft e.V., July 2020
ZSW Untersuchung zur Wirkung veränderter Flächenrestriktionen für PV-Freiflä-
chenanlagen, Short study by the ZSW on behalf of innogy SE, January 2019
28 Appendix: Figures
Figure 1: Percentage renewable energy in net electricity consumption for Germany, data
from [BMWi1], [BDEW3], [ISE4] ................................................................................ 6
Figure 2: Average end customer price (net system price) for installed rooftop systems
with rated nominal power from 10 - 100 kWp [ISE10], data BSW-Solar. .................... 8
Figure 3: Historical price development of PV modules (PSE AG/Fraunhofer ISE, data from:
Strategies Unlimited/Navigant Consulting/EuPD). The straight line shows the price
development trend. ................................................................................................. 9
Figure 4: Feed-in tariff for PV power as a function of commissioning date, average
remuneration of the bidding rounds of the Federal Network Agency, electricity prices
and average compensation for PV power, data from [BMWi1], [BDEW6]. ............... 11
Figure 5: Electricity price development on the day-ahead spot market [BDEW6] .......... 12
Figure 6: Merit order for conventional power plants in 2018 with an average CO2
certificate price of € 16 per ton [FFE]. ..................................................................... 13
Figure 7: Influence of RE on the average spot price on the energy exchange (EEX)
[BDEW2]. ............................................................................................................... 13
Figure 8: PV expansion and remuneration amount, data from [BMWi1], [BMWi5] ....... 14
Figure 9: Electricity consumption of industry and EEG surcharge 2019 [BDEW6].......... 15
Figure 10: Influential parameters and calculating method for the EEG surcharge [ÖKO]16
Figure 11: Price of CO2 allowances [BDEW6] .............................................................. 19
Figure 12: Components of the average domestic electricity price in 2020 (CHP: German
Combined Heat and Power Act); German Electricity Grid Access Ordinance (Strom-
NEV): easing the burden on energy-intensive industries; concession fee: fee for using
public land) [BDEW6]. ............................................................................................ 21
Figure 13: Development of gross domestic electricity prices, net electricity prices for
large-scale industrial consumers and the EEG surcharge, Daten aus [BMWi1] .......... 22
Figure 14: VIK Verband der Industriellen Energie- und Kraftwirtschaft e.V., electricity
price index for medium-voltage customers [VIK] ..................................................... 23
Figure 15: Electricity export (negative values indicate export) for Germany [ISE4] ......... 24
Figure 16: Rough estimate of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for PV power plants at
different annual irradiances.................................................................................... 25
Figure 17: PV power plant capacity by owner group [AEE3]. ....................................... 28
Figure 18: Concept for a virtual power plant of the Stadtwerke München (Munich
municipal works) [SWM] ........................................................................................ 29
Figure 19: Germany’s expenditure in the Energy Research Program of the Federal
Government by topic in € million [BMWi6]. ............................................................ 30
Figure 20: Funding for PV research categorized by technology in € million [BMWi7].... 30
Figure 21: Left: Feed-in of PV power [BSW], Right: Distribution of installed PV power
according to plant size [ISE10]................................................................................ 31
Figure 22: Electronically limited electrical energy in GWh/year [BNA] ........................... 32
Figure 23: Actual and predicted hourly generation of power in 2014 [ISE4]................. 33
Figure 24: Average power for the supply of solar and wind power in 2017, 15-minute
values [ISE4]........................................................................................................... 34
Figure 25: Electricity production of PV and wind in ascending hourly values for the year
2017 ..................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 26: Monthly production of PV and wind power for 2014 - 2017 [ISE4]. ............ 35
Figure 27: Example showing course of electricity trading price, conventional and
renewable electricity in the 18th calendar week in May 2018 [ISE 4] ....................... 36
Figure 28: System Average Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI) for different network
levels in minutes / year [BNA] ................................................................................. 37
Figure 29: Calculated energy payback times of PV power plants for European production
and operating sites [ISE10], data: Lorenz Friedrich .................................................. 38
Figure 30: Applications for the integration of photovoltaic.......................................... 40
Figure 31: Land use in Germany [FNR] ........................................................................ 41
Figure 32: Results of the survey on the construction of new power plants, data from
[Licht2] .................................................................................................................. 42
Figure 33: Survey results on the acceptance of different types of power plants [AEE4] 42
Figure 34: Forecasted hours of full-load operation for renewable energy generation in
2020, data from [ÜNB] .......................................................................................... 45
Figure 35: Horizontal annual global irradiation in Germany averaged over 1981-2010 47
Figure 36: Development of the atmospheric CO2 concentration and the mean global
temperature change based on the NASA Global Land-Ocean Temperature Index
[IEA2]. ................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 37: Estimate of the atmospheric CO2 concentration and the temperature in
Antarctica based on ice core data [EPA], added two recent readings from Mauna Loa
Observatory for CO2 concentration
[https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/data.html] ......................................... 49
Figure 38: Average CO2 equivalent emissions of various power generation technologies
[EnAg] ................................................................................................................... 50
Figure 39: Specific and absolute CO2 emissions of electricity generation in Germany
[UBA6]................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 40: Greenhouse gas emissions avoided by using renewable energy in 2019
[UBA1]................................................................................................................... 52
Figure 41: Development of annually installed PV capacity for Germany and the Rest of
World, (RoW), figures from EPIA , IHS, Solar Power Europe, with forecast for 2021. 53
Figure 42: Energy flow diagram 2019 for Germany in petajoules [AGEB]. ................... 55
Figure 43: Germany’s import quotas for fossil and nuclear energy sources
(www.umweltbundesamt.de)................................................................................. 55
Figure 44: Cost development for the provision of primary energy in Germany [ÖKO3] 56
Figure 45: Share of final energy in Germany, categorized by utilization 2017, Figures by
[BMWi1] ................................................................................................................ 57
Figure 46: Schematic representation of the REMod model [ISE12] ............................... 58
Figure 47: Schematic representation of a residual load curve for Germany with power
supply with 100% EE, with generators (+) and loads (-) .......................................... 59
Figure 48: Development of global power generation by technologies in the Sky-Scenario;
the diameter of the pie charts corresponds to the global power requirement [Shell] 61
Figure 49: Forecasts of IEA since 2006 and actual development of global annual PV
construction [Carb] ................................................................................................ 62
Figure 50: Yield development throughout the course of a day of PV plants installed in a
variety of different ways, calculated using the software PVsol on a predominantly
clear day in July in Freiburg, Germany. ................................................................... 63
Figure 51: Calculation example for the specific monthly yield of a PV system at Freiburg
for south-oriented modules with 30° inclination (maximum annual yield) and 60°
inclination.............................................................................................................. 63
Figure 52: Power plant availability [VGB]..................................................................... 64
Figure 53: Greenhouse gas emissions of today's compact-class vehicles as a function of
mileage [AGORA2] ................................................................................................ 66
Figure 54: Fictitious annual electricity production (8760 hours) for 200 GWp PV and 200
GWp wind, extrapolated on the basis of installation and yield data for 2017 ........... 68
Figure 55: Percent of on-site consumption in dependence of the battery capacity and PV
array power for a single-family home with an annual electricity consumption of 4,700
kWh. [Quasch] ....................................................................................................... 72
Figure 56: Comparison of the conventional and grid-optimized system operation [ISE7]
............................................................................................................................. 72
Figure 57: Specific investment costs for different electrolyzer technologies (PEMEL:
Membrane electrolysis, AEL: Alkaline electrolysis, HTEL: High-temperature electrolysis,
[NOW]) .................................................................................................................. 74
Figure 58: Technologies for energy storage and converters with today's achievable
efficiencies at the end of the converter chain, without combined heat and power .. 75
Figure 59: Installed capacity of hydroelectric power plants in neighboring countries,
figures from [IHA] .................................................................................................. 76
Figure 60: Simplified scheme of a Renewable Energy System with the most important
grid-related components of the categories production, conversion, storage and
consumption. ........................................................................................................ 77
Figure 61: Terms of electricity generation and consumption........................................ 88

Recent Facts About Photovoltaics in Germany

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Recent Facts About Photovoltaics in Germany

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Recent Facts about Photovoltaics in Germany

Current version available at https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/recent-

1 What purpose does this guide serve? ............................................................... 5

2 Are we reaching our annual capacity target?

If we calculate a PV expansion to 500 GWp by 2050, an average of 15 GWp of PV will

4 Is PV power too expensive?

To promote the energy turnaround and to stimulate investments in PV systems of various

• Expanding the north-south power lines for wind power

4.1 Levelized Cost of Energy

1. purchase investments to construct and install the plant

4.2 Feed-in Tariff

4.4 Determining the Differential Costs

Figure 8: PV expansion and remuneration amount, data from [BMWi1], [BMWi5]

A study by the Friedrich-Alexander-University in Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany has shown

4.5 Privileged Electricity Consumers

Figure 9: Electricity consumption of industry and EEG surcharge 2019 [BDEW6]

4.6 EEG Surcharge

5 Subventions and Electricity Prices

5.2 Are fossil fuel and nuclear power production subsidized?

5.2.1 Fossil energy sources

5.2.2 Nuclear power

5.3 Do tenants subsidize well-positioned home owners?

5.4 Does PV make electricity more expensive for householders?

5.5 Does PV increase the electricity price for industry?

6 Are we exporting large amounts of PV power to other European

7 Can small PV systems generate attractive returns?

8 Does installing PV only create jobs in Asia?

In 2018, the PV industry employed 24,000 people in Germany [BSW]. By comparison,

According to a study by EuPD Research, an annual expansion of 10 GW of PV requires

9 Are large energy suppliers interested in PV?

Figure 17: PV power plant capacity by owner group [AEE3].

Figure 20: Funding for PV research categorized by technology in € million [BMWi7].

The further expansion of PV should be geographically even more consumption-friendly,

Figure 22: Electronically limited electrical energy in GWh/year [BNA]

11.2.1 Solar power production is predictable

11.2.2 Peak production is significantly lower than installed PV capacity

Limiting («feed-in management”) individual plants to 70 percent of their rated power

11.2.3 Solar and wind energy complement each other

11.4 Conflicts with slow-response fossil and nuclear power plants

11.6 Does the expansion of PV have to wait for more storage?

A study by “AGORA Energiewende” identifies 12 measures to modernize the grids to

13 Is there enough space for PV in Germany?

When analyzing potentials, a distinction is made between a theoretical, a technical and

13.1 Do electricity and food production compete on arable land?

Figure 31: Land use in Germany [FNR]

13.2 Do PV systems destroy ecologically valuable areas?

Wind energy plants

Gas power station

Coal Power Station

Nuclear power plant

15 Are PV plants in Germany efficient?

15.1 Do PV plants degrade?

A study by Fraunhofer ISE of 44 larger, quality-tested rooftop systems in Germany has

15.2 Can PV modules become soiled?

15.3 Do PV plants often operate at full capacity?

• Tracking (see section 18.3.1)

16.4 Do dark PV modules warm up the Earth through their absorption?

17 Are PV systems capable of replacing fossil fuel and nuclear

18 Are we capable of covering a significant proportion of our energy

18.1 Energy demand and supply

Net import rate 2016

Brown coal -1.9 %